PS 166 has the most popular district gifted program on the Upper West Side, big song and dance performances, and an active Parents Association that raises a ton of money. Fine examples of children's art and writing are posted on bulletin boards throughout the school. One example: a 10-page guide to the school for prospective parents, written by a 1st-grader.The beautifully renovated building, constructed in 1897, has high ceilings and bright and sunny classrooms that are lavishly equipped with books and supplies. Children go outside even on cold days, and recess takes place before lunch to encourage children to eat more slowly and to create a calmer transition back to the classroom. The lunchroom is one of the more civilized ones we've seen.The rich arts programs can be heard and seen throughout the building. On one of our visits, we watched 3rd-grade girls twirl in red skirts as they practiced a Mexican folk dance. In the science lab, children plucked kalimbas, African thumb pianos, to explore pitch and amplification. In the music room children sang a lively spiritual. On another visit, we saw dance and music teachers collaborate to put on a musical production. Children made paintings in the style of Frida Kahloone of a series of lessons designed to teach art history as well as studio art.Children were engaged in every class we saw. During "center time," kindergartners may choose to play with blocks, write, read or put together plastic cubes that build math skills.The quality of writing is particularly high and Teachers College Reading and Writing Project works closely with teachers at PS 166. Kindergartners write "personal narratives" that may include New Year's resolutions. ("My resolution is to clean up my toys.") Older children write persuasive essays on topics such as "Should chocolate milk be banned in school?"Debra Mastriano, who became principal in 2012, has won high marks from district administrators for the rigor of the curriculum. The annual teacher survey, however, gives her mixed reviews for her leadership, and we heard some grumbling that she can be abrupt. She told us that some pushback from staff is inevitable as she steps up demands.The school was once starkly segregated, with mostly Black and Latino children in general education classes and mostly Whites in gifted and talented. But on our visit, we couldn't easily tell the difference between the classes. That's because more White families from the zone are opting for general education classes, which offer smaller class size than the G&T and the same wonderful art, music and drama that everyone enjoys. The quality of instruction is high throughout the school.
let reviewer for secondary math major pdf 166
Galileo took an interest in rates of fall when he was about 26 years old and a math teacher at the University of Pisa. It seemed to him that -- with no air resistance -- a body should fall at a speed proportional to its density. He decided to test this modified Aristotelian view by making an experiment.
Published by the American Mathematical Society, the Transactions of the American Mathematical Society (TRAN) is devoted to research articles of the highest quality in all areas of pure and applied mathematics.
The purpose of P-NP grading is to encourage students to broaden their education by taking courses outside the usual program of study for their major and minor disciplines. Students may choose to attempt a maximum of 9 semester credit hours on a Pass-Not Pass basis, meaning that only a P (Pass) or NP (Not Pass) will be recorded as their final grade in the course. The following policies apply:
I welcome and share the motivation to reach the majority decision under the banners of digital platforms and of equity, inclusion and diversity. However, I am of the opinion that the gains realized for Canadians in the majority decision are too small and that the trade-off is unnecessarily onerous.
This trade-off is directed at the very heart of the Canadian broadcasting system. The list of conditions of licence that are abandoned in the majority decision is long and includes the pivotal protections responsible for the recognized success of the Canadian broadcasting system and of the national public broadcaster. I consider that the general laissez-faire approach proposed in the majority decision in regard to traditional and digital platforms carries real and unnecessary risks of undermining the mandate of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and the Canadian broadcasting policy as set out in the Broadcasting Act (the Act). I cannot take this risk for the public broadcasting service financed through public funds in the billions of dollars.
In my view, the reasons supporting the conditions of licence imposed and in particular those not imposed include irregularities that are sufficiently serious for me not to subscribe to the conclusions of the majority decision. These irregularities raise issues of consistency, predictability, fairness and the future performance assessment of the CBC in delivering programming in accordance with its mandate as set out in paragraphs 3(1)(l) and (m) of the Act.
The impact of these irregularities is assessed in light of the minimum five-year period imposed by the Act, that is, the 2022-2027 period, without the Commission being able to correct the situation except upon application by the CBC. The mandatory consultation that was held with the CBC prior to the imposition of the conditions of licence in this case, which is also provided for in the Act, does not legitimize the conclusions of the majority decision.
I cannot subscribe to the reasons provided in support of the majority decision to completely eliminate specific conditions of licence relating to the exhibition of television content (with a few rare exceptions) for the national public broadcaster and to forego the imposition of conditions of licence that are carefully designed to achieve this balance.
The confidence shown in the national public broadcaster in the majority decision on the basis of its compliance history appears questionable to me on several levels, notably in regard to the lack of consideration of the different context (compared with the prevailing context during the last licence term) in which the CBC will be offering its content on its traditional and digital platforms. In addition to existing and new challenges, there will also be the consideration of opportunities available to the CBC through technological innovations. With online news, who knows how the CBC will leverage its digital platforms, or other digital platforms, to innovate (one hopes) and, at the same time, rethink the exhibition of traditional television news reports?
The majority decision proposes an approach that is different from the results-based approach applicable prior to the majority decision coming into force. The essence of this new approach consists in imposing conditions of licence requiring the CBC to file reports to demonstrate how its programming choices take into account public opinion research (or perception surveys) and public consultations. No binding measurable targets will be set by either the Commission or the CBC, either before or as part of this public opinion research and public consultation.
In this case at hand, according to my reading, these explanations are not provided in the majority decision, nor are any explanations justifying the marked asymmetries between similar activities that can be observed when considered as a whole. For example, exhibition requirements are imposed for local French-language audio programming for the radio station CBEF Windsor (15 hours of local French-language programming per week) because of the importance of this programming to the communities served by this station However, no similar conditions of licence are imposed in other official language minority communities that nevertheless requested such an intervention for the same reason.
Two key additions in the majority decision are most certainly data collection and expenditure requirements for equity-seeking independent producers. The data allow for making clearer decisions, informing the public and, eventually, improving the work carried out in regard to the monitoring of compliance. With this information, the Commission will be able to develop a more forward-looking and proactive approach. For example, detailed knowledge of current trends on both traditional and digital listening and viewing platforms will inform this work. Specifically for the CBC, the reports will also provide information on the results of public consultations and public opinion research in regard to the relevance of CBC programming on its own traditional and digital platforms.
In the majority decision, the great sacrifices made to obtain reports seem to me excessive and disproportionate, not only to the achievement of legislated and regulated objectives, but also in light of the other avenues available to achieve that objective. An investment by the national public broadcaster to improve traceability and discoverability is certainly one of them. These investments in technology would have improved the measurement framework in other ways, and in combination with revised and improved data collection. In a prospective view, all players would have benefited from such concerted efforts in regard to traceability and discoverability. These efforts would have resulted, in the longer term, in a reduction in the regulatory burden (reduced reporting or logs, for example) and a considerable increase in the effectiveness and efficiency of compliance activities for the industry as a whole by automating operations.
Consequently, without a condition of licence requiring minimum thresholds for hours of exhibition of local programming, including news, in metropolitan areas or expenditures for local programming in the majority decision, how can the CBC be held accountable? Relying on the power of public opinion to ensure compliance seems, in my view, insufficient given the potential responsibilities and consequences at stake. In addition, it is reasonable to anticipate confusion and a lack of predictability, including from the main stakeholder, the CBC. In short, it is my view that the design of the hybrid exhibition-expenditure approach in the majority decision has given the national public broadcaster a degree of flexibility that, without measurable and pre-established benchmarks, may create problems of interpretation during the next licence term and at the next licence renewal. 2ff7e9595c
Comments