IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23 , BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free : BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 , IGNOU BPCE 019 Assignment 2022-23, BPCE 019 Assignment 2022-23 , BPCE 019 Assignment , BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free IGNOU Assignments 2022-23- BACHELOR OF ARTS Assignment 2022-23 Gandhi National Open University had recently uploaded the assignments of the present session for BACHELOR OF ARTS Programme for the year 2022-23. IGNOU BDP stands for Bachelor’s Degree Program. Courses such as B.A., B.Com, and B.Sc comes under the BDP category. IGNOU BDP courses give students the freedom to choose any subject according to their preference. Students are recommended to download their Assignments from this webpage itself. Study of Political Science is very important for every person because it is interrelated with the society and the molar values in today culture and society. IGNOU solved assignment 2022-23 ignou dece solved assignment 2022-23, ignou ma sociology assignment 2022-23 meg 10 solved assignment 2022-23 ts 6 solved assignment 2022-23 , meg solved assignment 2022-23 .
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23
We provide handwritten PDF and Hardcopy to our IGNOU and other university students. There are several types of handwritten assignment we provide all Over India. BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free We are genuinely work in this field for so many time. You can get your assignment done – 8130208920
Important Note – IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 Download Free You may be aware that you need to submit your assignments before you can appear for the Term End Exams. Please remember to keep a copy of your completed assignment, just in case the one you submitted is lost in transit.
Submission Date :
- 31st March 2033 (if enrolled in the July 2033 Session)
- 30th Sept, 2033 (if enrolled in the January 2033 session).
All questions are compulsory.
Answer the following questions in 1000 words each. 3 x 15 = 45 marks
1. Discuss the importance of environment on workplace.
What are the benefits of a positive working environment?
Here are four benefits that you may encounter when working for a company that has a good work environment:
1. Boosts productivity
When working for an organisation that maintains a happy work environment, you may feel encouraged and motivated to finish more work. This may help you finish more tasks throughout your workday, which can lead to management trusting you with more responsibility. You may also produce a higher quality of work since you might feel prepared to finish your duties more efficiently.
2. Improves growth mindset
A workplace that encourages a healthy work environment may help employees have a growth mindset. This is when individuals focus on developing their skills to grow themselves and their company. Companies with a positive environment may encourage employees to grow their skills to help them achieve career advancement. They may also provide employees with the tools they need to grow, like mentorship opportunities or development seminars.
3. Increases collaboration
A positive work environment often allows for collaboration among employees. This can allow for staff to make friends, build professional relationships and grow their network. Increased collaboration may also allow employees to support each other, which may help employees achieve their goals.
Related: Collaboration Skills: Definitions and Examples
4. Improves employee morale
Employee morale is the attitude and mindset that employees have while working. A company’s work environment greatly affects employee morale. If a company has a positive environment, employees may have boosted morale. This can lead to higher satisfaction and a driven mindset.
Types of positive work environments
Companies may utilise one of the following work environments, or they can have different elements from each environment. Here are two different types of positive work environments that companies may have:
Team-based work environment
A team-based work environment encourages collaboration in the workplace. Many workplaces that have this type of environment structure their projects and task to incorporate teamwork. For example, management may create various teams to finish a project together, rather than having employees finishing projects separately. Many team members share responsibilities in this environment, and they can create bonds with one another while improving their teamwork skills.
Independent work environment
An independent work environment encourages employees to work separately from their colleagues. This may allow them to choose the working style that best suits them, rather than coordinating their working style to members of their team. Employees working in this environment may feel that they have more control over the work they produce, and they may develop their own skills individually. Workplaces may have employees complete some projects individually while completing others on a team so that they can receive positive benefits from each work environment.
Features of a work environment that is positive
A positive working environment has several noticeable factors. To better understand this atmosphere, it’s important to know its common attributes so you can look for them with your current or future employer. Here are some characteristics of a work environment that’s positive:
A positive environment for work has a calm atmosphere that leads to greater productivity. When you’re able to work with minimal distractions, you’re more likely to stay on task and accomplish more of your daily responsibilities. It also means you’re able to work in a stress-free setting that promotes your cognitive performance and physical well-being.
Healthy work environments include clear communication between various members of an organisation. This includes communication between employees and upper management and between coworkers themselves. When you have the opportunity to ask questions and receive feedback, it can help you feel valued in the workplace. It also allows you to grow by receiving open, constructive feedback.
For example, if you’re working on a new project that requires brainstorming, you can get ideas from your colleagues. Knowing you can ask them questions and receive honest feedback can help you grow your professional relationships and improve your overall quality of work.
Related: 5 Popular Communication Skills Interview Questions (With Sample Answers and Tips)
Compassionate team members
A positive work environment encompasses a level of respect, empathy and overall understanding between colleagues. These sentiments can also foster collaboration and help you feel heard and valued at your workplace. For example, when a coworker thanks you for assisting them on a project, it lets you know that you’re appreciated and that someone genuinely cares about your contribution to the company.
It’s important to work in a positive environment where you’re encouraged to grow your individual skills and strengths. This can help you find contentment in your job. This facet of a positive work environment is important because it means you’re able to advance in your field with the support of your employer, manager and coworkers. Also, the more motivated you are, the greater the quantity and quality of work you can produce.
Looking at work with a positive mindset can help spread a good mood throughout the day. For example, if you’re a team leader and you experience an issue with a client, the way you handle the situation can impact the attitude of others on your team. If you’re able to overcome the obstacle with an optimistic outlook, your team is more likely to follow your example. Ultimately, a positive outlook can help you and your team focus on the pros rather than the cons.
Good work-life balance
A work environment that is positive consists of a healthy balance between your personal and professional life. This ensures you can continue to find job satisfaction without letting your job overtake other areas of your life. Ultimately, a positive work environment encourages employees to find fulfilment in both their work and personal lives.
2. Explain the term urban public space. Discuss the uses of urban public space.
Public space is property open to public use. It can be privately or publicly owned. Geographic research on public space examines struggles over the production and transformation of publicly accessible spaces, their use, their political and social meanings, and their relationship to the construction of the public sphere. Much public space research in Anglophonic geography has focused on the Euro-American world, but new research is bringing urban public space in the developing world into focus. Key issues concerning public space are relations of inclusion and exclusion for different groups of people – such as homeless people – under conditions of political-economic change; gentrification, urban redevelopment, and corporatization; protest and resistance; the role of public space in shaping relations of gender, race, sexuality, and (dis)ability; and the function of public space in the struggle for rights to the city.
Definition of Public Space
Public space is variously addressed in the literature. As such, the literature also includes a variety of definitions of public space. Generally, however, public space is defined as space to which people normally have unrestricted access and right of way. In other words, public places and spaces are public because anyone is entitled to be physically present in them. Focusing on the way of engagement in places, public space is open, publicly accessible space where people go for group or individual activities. Public space is thus a place outside the boundaries of individual or small-group control, used for a variety of often-overlapping functional and symbolic purposes. Accordingly, people have access to spaces, access to activities, access to information, and access to resources. Public spaces, therefore, are usually multipurpose spaces distinguishable from completely green, partly green, or nongreen to soft or hard areas between built structures that are accessible to the public in the same way. To sum up, public space is an inseparable entity of a two-way process between both the components: public (people) and space (place). Public space is then not just a spatial frame, a waiting scene where an event will occur; it is more – it is publicspace.
Conceptualizing Urban Public Spaces
Urban public spaces take a multitude of forms, and serve a wide variety of purposes, and thus defy simple definition. Nevertheless, it is possible to distinguish between broad types of public space. One early distinction, offered by Michael Walzer, pointed to the difference between close-minded types of space intended for only one type of use, and those which were open-minded, where a variety of uses (and users) were tolerated. Many modern urban spaces – shopping centers, government complexes, highways, and dormitory suburbs – fell into the former category, and sought to preclude social mixing and political activity. By contrast, many of the more established outdoor public spaces of the traditional inner city – the street, piazza, and park – were open-minded and offered opportunities for political action and civic discourse. Importantly, however, the unpredictability of open-minded spaces was often perceived as threatening, and in practice, many developed at least informal exclusionary practices.
Notions of exclusion and access are also at the fore in Kurt Iveson’s examination of four models of public space; models which refer both to particular organizations of material space, and to different ideals promoted by theorists of public life. First, the ceremonial model of public space centers on large-scale civic sites – most notably city squares and plazas – in which people gather, particularly to mark significant events in the life of the nation or city. Historically, these spaces have been important sites for the display of state and church power, while more recently they have been subject to increasing corporate influence. By virtue of public ownership, central location, and large scale, they have also been key sites for political gathering and protest.
Public space is central to political and social life in cities. Streets, squares, and parks are places for protesting, socializing, and encountering difference. They contribute to the reputation of cities for vibrancy and livability, and to the well-being of urban residents. For the homeless, public space is also where many basic needs must be fulfilled. Since public space is so important, it is highly regulated, with myriad rules governing use and access. These rules often target groups deemed socially undesirable or threatening to economic goals, undermining the inclusionary character of public space. By contrast, the concept of the right to the city envisions access to public space and participation in its management as universal freedoms. In practice, the organization of public space commonly reflects the priorities of dominant socioeconomic groups, who exercise disproportionate influence over its provision, governance, and material form. These groups also benefit most when improvements in public space contribute to gentrification processes. Nevertheless, the open character of public space means that possibilities for unanticipated uses and transgressive behaviors usually remain. This openness helps to ensure that public space retains its value as a site for discussion and debate—a core part of the public sphere—alongside increasingly important online spaces.
Origins in Traditional Cultural Practices (Folk, Rural, Urban)
Historically, traditional cultural practices were connected to religious or pagan celebrations. Concepts of time and place as part of a cycle of destruction and regeneration ensured that particular activities relating to community survival, such as planting and harvesting, were undertaken correctly. The importance of a fertile earth in pagan communities to ensuring the maintenance and survival of communities also led to elaborate practices associated with certain places, dates, and even hours of the day (e.g., celebrations during the summer and winter equinoxes). Remnants of such fertility rites can be discerned in some contemporary carnival activities.
This paper is set to explore design and Making as intermingled with education of children. It has been acknowledged that engaging in different participatory design and Making activities has the potential to teach children valuable 21st century skills, such as critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, teamwork, and communication (e.g. , , ). Previous literature has introduced numerous design and Making projects conducted with children in schools as well as in informal learning settings [see 56]. In addition to the actual Making part, these projects often include distinct phases for design and ideation, and because of this, they don’t teach children only Making skills e.g. ,  but also designerly thinking and user-centered or participatory design skills , . However, user-centered design, participatory design, and Making have somewhat differing background philosophies and foci, particularly related to who is the target of design/Making. While human or user-centered design and participatory design focus on appreciating and engaging the user, seen as separable from the designer skills wise (see e.g. , , , , ), the philosophy behind Maker movement underscores Do-It-Yourself (DIY) approach – being able to make and modify things yourself for your own use, with a strong community aspect though (e.g. , ). When educating future designers and Makers, for user-centered designers empathy towards others is considered essential , and in participatory design ethical responsibilities of designers towards users have always been in the forefront (see e.g. ), whereas Making in education is more focused on Makers’ technical skills and fulfilling Makers’ own needs (e.g. , ).
We argue that for the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community in general and for the Child-Computer Interaction (CCI) community in particular, it is pivotal to reflect on these differences when engaging with children in design and Making projects. The existing literature has not discussed these fundamental differences in depth, even if a body of research on design and Making with children in the context of their education has already been published. We maintain it is important for the researchers to be aware, understand, and reflect on this variety when educating children with projects that combine design and Making with children. Because of this, we address in this paper the problem of embedded assumptions in methodological choices in design and Making projects with children in the context of their education. In other words, we ask: who are we actually designing for in design and Making projects with children in the context of their education, and what do we wish to teach to children through design and Making?
In this paper, we first discuss the existing literature addressing design and Making with children, concentrating on the variety involved in these studies. Then, we introduce the research design and methodology involved in this study. This study represents qualitative research, in which we explore a series of design and Making projects conducted in three different schools with 7–15-year-old children. We present and analyze the field study and design and Making tasks the children participated in during the projects, and their outcomes. In our analysis, we particularly focus on challenges encountered. Based on the existing literature and our empirical insights, we present a categorization – mapping the diversity in the field – that should be helpful for researchers and practitioners conducting design and Making projects with children in education context: it should enable them to make conscious choices on who to design for and what to aim to teach to children in the projects, helping in planning the activities as well as positioning the research. The categorization reveals underlying assumptions concerning what we are actually teaching children through design and making projects. This study focuses on technology and STEM education of children, addressing the educational/learning goals in particular, leaving out an examination of children’s actual learning processes and outcomes.
Already since the 1980s, the significance of user and human-centered design (HCD) has been emphasized in the HCI field while designing products and services. It has been underscored that designers need to understand the people they are designing for, they need to engage users in the design process to get their feedback on the design solution, and they need to iterate the design solution based on users’ feedback , . Participatory Design (PD) tradition, moreover, has for even longer stressed the importance of users’ active engagement in the design process: users should have a voice in the design process affecting their lives, and therefore PD sessions need to be organized in a way that enables users’ genuine participation and influence , , .
Such developments have been highly influential in CCI research. Children have been invited into the design process as informants, testers, and design partners for decades already, at least for indicating their needs and providing feedback on the evolving design, if not for engaging as equal design partners in a participatory design process , , , , , , , . Druin, but also many after her, have been influenced by the Scandinavian PD tradition and emphasized that projects need to be organized in a way that children’s participation as equal partners and their influence in the design are ensured (e.g. , ). Some researchers have also underscored the political aspects of Scandinavian PD in their work with children, arguing for empowerment of children and requesting even more powerful and influential roles for them in the design process, such as the protagonist role (see e.g. , ).
Much of the previous research, albeit valuable, has invited children to take part in the design process as ‘experts of being a kid’, representing his or her own viewpoint in the design process. In the literature, few studies have specifically considered how to enable children to start acting as designers – responsible for the design work and designing for someone else, not only for oneself. In most of the studies, children’s personal development as designers is not considered; it seems it is implicitly assumed that there are adult designers – human- or user-centered or participatory ones – responsible for the design process, inviting and facilitating children’s participation. However, some CCI studies can be found that specifically emphasize offering children designer skills and competencies as part of their education (see e.g. , , ), showing an emerging interest on the topic. There are CCI studies in which children have been engaged in conducting user or field studies, including interviews and observation, with the aim to understand user needs, not only their own needs as users (e.g. , , , , ). Such information has been collected by children acting as designers themselves, potentially as part of an intergenerational design team. There is also research aiming at arousing empathy in children as part of the design process with different kinds of thought exercises, storytelling and reflection ( , ). Empathy towards users is generally considered a cornerstone of human- or user-centered design. The studies show that children developed empathy towards fictional characters they were designing for, acting as protagonists in the stories. In one study children acted as designers of games as well as arranged usability testing sessions into which they invited other children, to gain feedback for the improvement of the games, clearly adopting a designer position .
All this indicates that in some CCI studies the topic of adopting a designer position and designing for someone else has been acknowledged: there is an extensive body of research discussing design with child design partners as well as a relatively limited yet emerging body of research discussing the challenges and practices involved in inviting children to develop their designer skills and competencies and to design for someone else. Next, this literature base is contrasted with the literature addressing Making.
Maker movement – DIY for yourself
In the Maker movement, democratizing of innovation is in the focus: ordinary people acquiring and using skills that enable them to innovate, design, engineer, and program personally meaningful objects for their own use, solving their problems (see e.g. , ). Open source software and hardware, and hacker and do-it-yourself (DIY) movements form the background to the Maker movement, emphasizing people taking their own initiative in the creation of software, hardware, and other tools for serving their personal needs and interests. Making, however, is not only a solo activity entirely focusing on an individual’s interests and needs, but there is a strong communal aspect involved, too. Important part of the Maker movement is sharing knowledge with others, giving to others what one has made, participating in and contributing to the wider community and helping each other (see e.g. , , ,  , , , ). However, the very basic idea of Making is individual-oriented: “Making is fundamental to what it means to be human. We must make, create, and express ourselves to feel whole. There is something unique about making physical things. These things are like little pieces of us and seem to embody portions of our souls.” .
The maker movement has made its way rapidly into education contexts: it is seen to have a remarkable potential to transform STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education (see e.g. ). Besides learning how to design and make products per se, Making has potential in teaching children also other valuable skills and mindsets needed in the 21st century, such as critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, teamwork, and communication skills (see e.g. , , ). Integrating Making related activities in education has been embraced by researchers and practitioners alike , .
CCI researchers have also embraced the Maker movement and advocated children engaging in Making (e.g. , , , , ,  , , , , ). However, there is quite a lot of variety in these studies regarding their goals and practices. Clearly differing learning goals and subjects have been associated with the studies. In some of them, the priority has been in children’s technology or STEM education and in developing children’s Making skills (e.g. , , ) while in others the emphasis has rather been on design education and a creative, user-centered design process around Making activities has been emphasized (e.g. , ). In many of the studies children have been designing and Making personally meaningful objects and tools (e.g. , , ) while in others the objects under development have been integrated with science education, addressing different science subjects (e.g. ). Moreover, in others, social science related topics such as community development (e.g. , ) and solving of societally relevant problems (, , ) have been underscored. We think that addressing community or societally relevant problems include necessarily designing for someone else, not only for the self. However, so far CCI studies have not reflected on the fundamental differences between design and Making in education in terms of whom the work is to serve and what we are teaching to children about design and Making along the way.
To show even more variety within the Maker movement, we point out an entrepreneurial vision of Making that has been contrasted with a hobbyist one  discussed so far in this paper. Within the entrepreneurial vision, the Maker movement has been seen as a powerful enabler for innovation  and as related to the user innovation concept (see ). Making is closely connected with business and seen as a key to entrepreneurship (, ). A lot of business has been growing around Making, Maker fairs and Makerspaces with a number of established companies and a stream of startups emerging , the entrepreneurial action of the Makers ranging from hobbyist to small business owners, growth entrepreneurs, and corporate innovators . Maker movement may influence entrepreneurship through different channels: Makers may accidentally find out that their solutions are of interest to a wider community, enabling building business around them. Moreover, rapid prototyping is at the heart of Making, perfectly serving new product development and building of new business. In addition, the wider network involved in Making may be purposely utilized for idea generation and innovation in business. , . For existing businesses, the Maker community has been argued to be both a source for new talents and new ideas to be exploited in business , and the multidisciplinary nature of Makerspaces makes them a valuable source for new ideas, compared with a traditional business environment .
Some have already embraced Making as a source for new businesses and entrepreneurship in the context of children’s education. They see it as a possibility for children to grow to ‘digital innovators of future’ who can change the world through their skills . For this end, efforts combining Making and early entrepreneurial education, even if still relatively rarely reported, have emerged, Unterfrauner et al.  and Fraunhofer et al.  reporting on such a project. They argue for the pedagogical value of Making in early entrepreneurship education . In this, children should learn essential abilities, useful in their future education and practices, as it is many years before they possibly end up using those abilities for professional purpose , . The focus of entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurship in general is largely about creating such business where a customer is willing to pay for the value added by some products or services. Therefore, the focus of entrepreneurial Making widens designing for oneself, or a ‘user’, to a new concept, a ‘paying customer.’ Such a shift implies again diversity in terms of what children are being taught and the ethical and political implications. Yet, these aspects are not discussed in the literature.
This study represents qualitative, interpretive research, which does not involve formal propositions, quantifiable measures of variables or hypothesis testing , but instead qualitative researchers studying “things in their natural setting, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them” ( : 3). In this study, we explore meanings making within our design and Making projects with children that we have organized in collaboration with their teachers.
In this section, we introduce the three design and Making projects conducted in three public schools in Oulu area in Finland. Through which we illustrate the challenges related to design and Making activities with children. The presented projects proceeded the arguments elaborated in this paper but the general learning goal in all these projects was for children to learn design and Making skills. The children involved in the projects were selected by volunteering teachers who were willing to experiment with the design and Making project as part of their teaching. Teachers indicated four classes of children to work with. Teachers from the 1st grade, a special need class (project A), and 4th grade (project B), and English and social studies teachers with 9th grade class (project C) participated the project. When conducting any research with children, one must carefully consider the ethical issues. Guidelines of the Ethics committee of human sciences of University of Oulu were consulted. As this research concerned minors, it was essential to gain informed consent both from the children and their guardians. All children received an informed consent form giving information on the research and asking whether the children themselves were willing and whether the guardians allowed the participation of the children in the study. 61/81 children returned the consent to take part in the study. In all projects, all the children participated in the activities as part of their normal teaching, but material was collected only from the children with informed consent. Ages of the participating children varied between 7 and 15 years. All projects were conducted in 2018.
Answer the following questions in 400 words each. 5 x 5 = 25 marks
4. Discuss some environmental cues for designing health care settings.
5.Define the concept of territoriality. Explain the techniques to measure territoriality.
6. Differentiate between crowding and density. Discuss the effects of crowding
7. Discuss the relationship between environmental perception and environmental situation.
8.Explain the importance of personal space.
IGNOU Handwritten Hardcopy , WhatsApp – 8130208920
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 We provide handwritten PDF and Hardcopy to our IGNOU and other university students. There are several types of handwritten assignment we provide all Over India. BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free We are genuinely work in this field for so many time. You can get your assignment done – 8130208920
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23
GET IGNOU Handwritten Hardcopy , WhatsApp – 8130208920
Answer the following questions in 50 words each. 10 x 3 = 30 marks
9. Open plan office
10. Sociofugal and sociopetal design
11. Emphasis of urban designers
12. Social factors affecting territoriality
13. Ecological psychology
15. Environmental assessment
16. Environmental attitude
17. Place identity
18. Impact of disasters
Get IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free Now here from this website.
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 get here all ignou solved assignment 2022-23 , ignou guess paper , ignou help books and ignou exam related material. We help students to get their assignment done with our handwritten services, BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free you can access our all material and services through WhatsApp also , 8130208920
GET SOLVED PDF – Click Here
IGNOU Instructions for the BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 Download Free Before attempting the assignment, please read the following instructions carefully.
- Read the detailed instructions about the assignment given in the Handbook and Programme Guide.
- Write your enrolment number, name, full address and date on the top right corner of the first page of your response sheet(s).
- Write the course title, assignment number and the name of the study centre you are attached to in the centre of the first page of your response sheet(s).
- Use only foolscap size paperfor your response and tag all the pages carefully
- Write the relevant question number with each answer.
- You should write in your own handwriting.
GUIDELINES FOR IGNOU Assignments 2022-23
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23 You will find it useful to keep the following points in mind:
- Planning: Read the questions carefully. IGNOU BPCE 019 Assignment 2022-23 Download Free Download PDF Go through the units on which they are based. Make some points regarding each question and then rearrange these in a logical order. And please write the answers in your own words. Do not reproduce passages from the units.
- Organisation: Be a little more selective and analytic before drawing up a rough outline of your answer. In an essay-type question, give adequate attention to your introduction and conclusion. IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 Download Free Download PDF The introduction must offer your brief interpretation of the question and how you propose to develop it. The conclusion must summarise your response to the question. In the course of your answer, you may like to make references to other texts or critics as this will add some depth to your analysis.
- Presentation: IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-2023 Download Free Download PDF Once you are satisfied with your answers, you can write down the final version for submission, writing each answer neatly and underlining the points you wish to emphasize.
The top of the first page of your response sheet should look like this: Get IGNOU Assignment Front page through. And Attach on front page of your assignment. Students need to compulsory attach the front page in at the beginning of their handwritten assignment.
ENROLMENT NO: …………………………………………………….
COURSE TITLE: ………………………………………………………
ASSIGNMENT NO: …………………………………………………
STUDY CENTRE: …………………………………………….……..
IGNOU BPCE 019 Solved Assignment 2022-23 – We provide handwritten PDF and Hardcopy to our IGNOU and other university students. BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free Download PDF There are several types of handwritten assignment we provide all Over India. BPCE 019 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Solved Assignment 2022-23 Download Free Download PDF We are genuinely work in this field for so many time. You can get your assignment done –8130208920
Related Material Also –
BUY PDF & Handwritten
- Solved PDF Cost – @50 rs per Paper / Subject
- Handwritten Hardcopy – @350 rs per paper/ subject
WhatsApp – 813020892