text:
The INNY Award
Council on Basic Writing Blog
Because Basic Writing Is Where We All Begin!
Category: CCCC 2016
Posted in CBW 2016, CCCC 2016, Professional Developmwnt, Scholarship of Basic Writing, Sense of the House Motion, Teaching
TSIG Updates
Posted on 04/08/2016 by J. Elizabeth Clark
We had a rowdy TSIG meeting discussing basic writing!
The TSIG began with a celebration of the University of New Mexico, who won this year's INNY award for their Stretch and Studio program!
Then, we moved into small groups to explore possible areas for policy areas that CBW should explore. Small groups brainstormed some of the following policy & focus or inquiry areas:
A statement on ethical textbook selection: instructor-generated, no workbooks, costs, peer reviewed, derived from BW and comp Rhet pedagogy, ethical selection,
themes like: education, freedom, community-building, social justice, non-cognitive;
How do we talk with instructors about how and why they use different texts?
A survey on student access to technology (what do our students actually have access to?)
Faculty preparation & qualifications necessary to teach basic writing (maybe a certification as an add on to an MA or PH.D. program).
State and Federal mandates on curriculum without research;
Transferring courses from one college to another;
Different ALP models;
Recommendations on effective preparation for teachers of basic writing (this would put the onus on programs and not serve as a mandate);
A sense of the house motion (or other legislation before CCCC) on M.A. and Ph.D. programs including basic writing as course that graduate students teach (there are a lot of issues here: mandating versus an elective– we need to explore this in more depth);
A sense of the house motion (or other legislation before CCCC) that M.A. and Ph.D. programs include a course on the teaching of basic writing (The teaching of basic writing. See notes above about exploring this in more depth);
If graduate students don't get a chance to put theory and practice together, this perpetuates ideas about basic writing that doesn't really match the reality of the basic writing classroom;
We should look at the C's statement on preparing faculty for college-level writing;
Could we think about asking people to integrate basic writing into different classes (upside: doesn't segregate basic writing from the rest of comp; downside: doesn't allow you to dig into basic writing);
We wrapped up after sharing from our brainstorm. The group was really excited about these issues!
Are you interested in working on these issues? If so, please reach out via the CBW-listserv to continue the discussion! We look forward to hearing from you!
Posted in CBW 2016, CBW Innovations Award, CCCC 2016, Uncategorized
2016 INNY Award
Congratulations to the University of New Mexico for winning this year's CBW Innovation Award!
Posted in Basic Writing Projects & Initiatives, CBW 2016, CCCC 2016, Politics of Remediation, Scholarship of Basic Writing, What's New in Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?
Open Business Meeting
Posted on 04/07/2016 04/08/2016 by J. Elizabeth Clark
Michael Hill, CBW Co-Chair, opened the business meeting by welcoming everyone! The open business meeting is focused on making sure that we get lots of input from our basic writing community!
1. WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS
We had the opportunity to hear from colleagues around the country and hear some of the exciting research and scholarship faculty are working on!
Also in introductions, we heard about basic writing issues concerning faculty across the country such as placement, second language learners in basic writing, syllabi, etc. We discussed the importance of networking and the basic writing community coalition building.
2. MEMBER SURVEY:
Michael Hill and Lynn Reid, Co-Chairs, summarized the results of a member survey conducted by Marisa Klages-Bombich.
CBW Membership Survey Responses
(for a Word Version, click here: SURVEYCBW2015)
Institutions with participants in survey:
2 year schools: 28
4-year schools: 26
Helena College University of Montana
Bronx Community College, CUNY
Bishop State Community College
Kingsborough CC, CUNY
University of Wisconsin Colleges
Nassau Community College, Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, Lehman College
Shawnee State University
North Shore Community College
Central Virginia Community College
Prairie State College
City College at MSUB
LaGuardia CC (2)
Southwestern Illinois College
College of Southern Idaho
Housatonic Community College
Heartland Community College (Normal IL)
University of Colorado, Colorado Springs
Ivy Tech Central Indiana
Texas Woman's University
Bristol Community College, Quinsigamond Community College, Roger Williams University
The Art Institute of New York City
Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University
Bishop State Community College (2)
Metropolitan Community College, Omaha Nebraska
Salina Area Technical College
University of Dubuque
Whatcom Community College
Joliet Junior College
Heartland Community College
Titles of respondents:
Assistant Professor: 11
Associate Professor: 11
Professor: 11
Part-time Faculty: 2
Instructor: 12
Lecturer: 1
Graduate Teaching Assistant: 1
Senior Lead Instructor: 1
Developmental Program Coordinator: 1
WPA only: 2
WPA in addition to above title: 5
Do you consider yourself a member of CBW?
N= 52
Nearly 63% of respondents consider themselves members of CBW.
(Yes: 34, No: 5, Don't Know: 11, No answer: :2)
The Council on Basic Writing participates in or produces a number of different resources for its members and for the world of Basic Writing. Which of the following do you use?
A majority of respondents use a combination of CBW resources. Six respondents used only the listserv (3) or facebook (3). The other 52 repondents used some combination of all the tools:
How should people become members?
We offered three pathways to membership:
Participation at C's or on listserve (n=29)
Online Sign-up or at a CBW function (n=30)
Recruiting members through social media (n=30)
Nearly everyone believed that all three pathways to membership are acceptable and no one method was strides ahead of the other, most people voted for all three pathways.
What should the duties of membership include?
We asked what the duties of membership should include and offered the following options, respondents could choose more than one option:
Participation at C's and on the listserv (n=47)
Voting on organization policy and board membership (n=37)
Voting on public policy and pedagogy statements (n=36)
Participation on CBW committees (n=30)
Commitment to regional action on Basic Writing issues (n=38)
Overwhelmingly, respondents found that participation at C's and on the listserv should constitute member responsibilities.
However, a number of people also believed that voting on organization issues or public policy issues are also important, as is a commitment to regional basic writing issues. The lowest number of people selected participating in CBW committees.
Which of the following information would you be interested in?
We asked members what information they'd be interested in having related to CBW. (n=52)
Most people are interested in Official CBW literature and an Official Website.
On which of the following committees would you be interested in serving?
We asked people which committees they would be interested in serving on. People could select more than one committee. There is interest in serving on CBW committees, though the interest is not entirely robust.
Affiliations and Outreach (18)
Elections to Executive Board/Steering Committee (6)
Executive Board/Steering Committee (16)
Policy Task Force (17)
Would you be willing to pay CBW membership dues to help the organization grow? If so what would be reasonable? (people could select more than one option)
The majority of respondents favor a sliding scale dues schedule; however, $15-$25.00 was the most popular dollar amount. If we consider the 24 respondents who consider themselves members and set a $20.00 membership fee, that would have given us an annual operating budget of $680.00.
Other comments-see below.
Any other comments, questions or suggestions/and or concerns regarding the CBW?
All of this is a fantastic idea, and I can't wait to see what you guys do!
I would really love to see CBW grow as an organization and offer a rich set of professional resources and policy statements. There is a tremendous need for national leadership to ensure that teaching, program administration, and state policies draw from scholarship and evidence-based disciplinary practices.
I'm extremely busy and just like to have access to the listserv–it gives me a quick and informal idea of what is of interest and/or concern to others involved in basic writing.
Although I indicated above that I consider myself a "member" of the CBW, I've never really felt like it's been like a traditional academic organization. I am pleased to see this survey because I am hoping to become more involved (since before I wasn't sure how to even go about doing that!).
I'm relatively new to my position and Basic Writing, but I have learned a great deal from the listserv and online resources. I appreciate the materials and all the work that has gone into creating them. Thank you!
I think this is a great idea! We need to develop a CBW presence in a variety of ways, and I am more than happy to be a part of the growth of this organization!
The question about dues is a challenging one, but to develop and maintain a more robust presence, it does seem like CBW will need resources. I nonetheless do think that part-time faculty should be asked to commit less than full-time faculty. Another option might be to suggest a donation, but to also offer prospective members the opportunity to "opt out" of a financial commitment without penalty. Even the high end of your suggested dues–$30 to $40–is significantly less than what I see some other professional organizations, including some of those involved with developmental education, charge their membership.
I am new to the listserv and greatly appreciate its existence. My professional obligations and limited funds usually prohibit my attending major conferences, but I would be willing to work behind the scenes as the organization grows. Thank you for doing this survey (along with everything else).
MAIN CONCERN: Opportunities for active participation throughout the year would offer more meaningful visibility than paid membership.
Since most of the people that would benefit from a more active CBW are probably NOT tenure-track faculty, charging for membership at this time seems inappropriate. Once we build a more visible and more participatory organization that works THROUGHOUT THE YEAR on Basic Writing issues, then paid membership could be reconsidered.
Indeed, participation seems more crucial than "membership." Building committees and other opportunities for participation could be crucial for helping to create the main issue that CBW has now: participation outside of CCCC. Committees that stay active throughout the year would help to increase CBW visibility. Membership– especially PAID membership– with not much to offer in return other than CCCC-related pursuits — would not have as much impact.
This survey is a great idea! 🙂
I would love to see a CBW presence at regional TYCAs. Some of us cannot afford to get to CCCCs or will not choose to leave our classrooms in order to attend it, but we're able to attend TYCA more easily. I would be willing to serve as a CBW representative at my TYCA region. I only attend CCCCs when it coincides with Spring Break so I miss out on many CBW opportunities.
Please plug BWe more. I intend to check it out but forget. Including TOC in an email instead of attachment is recommended because then I see why I need to leave email-land right now and check out X article.
P.S. I'd also like to help with the pedagogy statement that was started at CCCCs, and, um, while I'm suggesting things…what are the possibilities the CBW workshop could be a half day instead of the marathon 9 to 5 session? I sort of get burned out 2 days into CCCCs when I start it with such a lengthy day right after traveling and then try to hit the SIGs and otherwise do all the things. This might just be me though.
Thank you for the work you have done and continue doing to create and sustain the CBW community.
I might consider serving on a committee, but it would depend on the time commitment involved as my role on campus and my system-wide committee work leaves me with limited time for meaningful work serving my professional organizations.
Collecting dues, maintaining records, establishing a bank account, cashing checks in a timely manner, etc.–all can be a huge challenge. When I was Chair in the early 80s, we did have a low membership fee of $5 or $10 or so. Members were to receive mailed newsletters for the fee. It was extremely difficult to keep track of and handle money and get the newsletter out in a timely fashion to the right addresses. Often the newsletter was done just days before the CCCC, and of course, some people's addresses had changed. Sometimes people complained if they had not received a newsletter and naturally enough wanted their money back. So I would proceed with caution where money comes into play. If you go this route, I recommend getting someone else to handle it–would the CCCC handle money for CBW maybe?
Thanks for this!! Let me know what else I can do. We need more presence between other groups such as NAADE, etc. they are so elitist and get so bogged down in local issues, not realizing we all need to work together.
I am a basic writing specialist and would love to be better connected to people, conversations, research, etc. I feel like I'm having a hard time finding that community and hope that changes!
Establish standards for faculty who teach Basic Writing.
This is a great group, and I loved the workshop. I wonder how we can encourage more two-year college faculty to join the group and find it relevant to the work they do.
I think the list serve does qualify me as a member, but I'm really not sure. But I think making the membership and organization of CBW more parallel to CCCC/NCTE would legitimize it more. Thanks for the survey–good idea!
I'm not quite sure on the CBW relationship to other organizations: CCCC, NCTE, etc. I know TYCA has an unusual relationship; CBW?
Don't make it complicated or exclusive. Invite and include everyone who may be interested. Emphasize what we do in terms of social justice.
Thank you for this thoughtful survey. I agree that more systematically reaching into the BW community for CBW is a good idea. Regarding the drafting of policy statements, I'm concerned that making the participation too far-reaching too soon, things might become unwieldy. Perhaps there could be policy forums online and the voting/ crafting of policies could find its major shaping influence at CBW or within its committees.
The survey was created from the desire to learn more about how CBW could serve the Basic Writing Community. This survey was released on March 21, 2015, shortly after CCCC 2015. It was open for over 1 month and the link was posted in multiple online venues. We received 54 responses. Forty-eight responses were NOT from current executive board membership. Most questions had 52-53 respondents.
3. Discussion of the Survey:
There was general agreement that the survey was very useful! This is a summary of the group discussion in response to the member survey:
How do we adapt to changing notions of basic writers? How do we support them? How do we support the work of supporting those students?
How many people do we have in the CBW?
Susan Naomi Bernstein raised the issue that categorizing students as "basic writers" essentializes the students.
How might we identify the populations that we serve? How might we identify the work we are doing in the world? The work our students are doing?
We need to make sure that people know what resources are out there (and to provide a central place for those resources–like an expanded resource share). Because of language: "basic" writers, "developmental" writing, "remedial" writing, etc. it's hard to know where to start.
It would also be helpful to have a library of resource and position statements (e.g. course caps, budgets, etc.).
How do we talk about our work so that other people can find it without being reductive? (again, how do we talk about our work)?
We need keywords in Basic Writing (and something like an Amazon recommendation: if you like this… you'll like this…).
We need more ways for people to participate actively and feel an important part of the CBW. We would like to create opportunities for people to consider themselves members of CBW by doing.
We also discussed ideas for next year's workshop.
4. What is the work of CBW when we are not at CCCC?
How might we think about committee work and the work of CCCC?
We recently lost funding for our travel award. This was one way that we were able to help participants.
We discussed ways to support the scholarship of graduate students; contingent faculty, etc.
Should we find ways to connect to NADE? How do we participate in NADE discussions about basic writing? A connection point might be some of the larger politics around developmental education.
Also, we need to continue the TYCA connections. These were useful to promote the work of CBW and a gathering of figuring out who is interested & who wants to be connected to this work. If we are strategic about it, it's a starting point to build panels together and to take concerns and translate them into action in a particular geographic area.
Also, we discussed how we are defining ourselves and how we represent ourselves in our outreach.
There was a discussion about funding and how to get funding (to be continued).
We discussed several new possible committees to continue the work of CBW outside of CCCC:
A committee to support the work of scholars in the form of an annual award for the best graduate student work in basic writing.
An issues committee to work on policy issues.
A promotion committee/outreach for people who don't get to come to CCCC to make our work more visible.
We'll continue this discussion in the SIG tonight at 6:30 p.m. Looking forward to seeing you all there!
Many thanks to everyone who attended!
We look forward to seeing you at the other CBW events at CCCC this week!
Thursday, 4/7 4:45-6:00
E.06 CBW Sponsored Session Hilton Ballroom of the Americas, Salon E, Level 2
TSIG.02 CBW Sig GRB Room 351C, Level 3
Posted in CBW 2016, CCCC 2016
Creating Space for Writing as Activist Practice: Writing with WITS
Posted on 04/06/2016 04/06/2016 by Sara Webb-Sunderhaus
Our last session is brought to us by the Houston-based Writers in the Schools (WITS) program. The WITS approach engages teachers and students in shared writing experiences while providing an embedded learning community. WITS partners professional writers with schools, prisons, juvenile detention centers, and other groups for one-hour workshops each week, which are safe spaces for writing as activist practice.
This workshop was very participatory, which is why this blog is short. Among other things, we focused on the power of image and did an activity that illustrated how even small alterations can change the meaning of an image. These types of activities are powerful pedagogy, in and outside the classroom.
Diverse Needs and Talents: Acting on the Promise of BW
This session focuses on contact points between the mission(s) of BW programs, the institution, and teaching practice, highlighting the diverse needs and talents of students enrolled in basic writing courses. The chair is Barbara Gleason, and speakers are Andrew Lucchesi (CUNY Grad Center), Hope Parisi (Kingsborough CC), and Christie Toth (Utah).
Andrew Lucchesi, "Experiments in Disabling the Basic Writing Classroom" (access talk at www.tinyurl.com/cbw-disability). Central question: How can a disability studies approach enable me to support students in the writing classroom? Focusing on two types of disabilities: learning disabilities (dyslexia and information processing impairments) and psychosocial disabilities: psychiatric impairments, such as depression or anxiety; development impairments, such as ADD; and social processing impairments, such as ASD.
Disability is an asset in the classroom, and a disability studies approach improves our pedagogy and pushes us to be more inclusive in the writing classroom. Lucchesi argues it's the disparity of strengths that characterize learning disabilities, and he sees the BW classroom as an exciting place to build on written, aural, and spoken modes of composing. Lucchesi shows various adaptive tools and argues these tools can work for all students.
Speaker Two is Hope Parisi: "Writing Through the Academic Looking Glass: A Basic Writing and Support Services Tutorial Model for Multiple Repeaters."At Kingsborough Community College, an exit exam must be passed for students to move into first-year writing courses, and some students repeatedly fail the exam. Her central question is whether a place still exists for "repeaters" in remedial structures, beyond a college's or program's default structures. How long will this place exist, and will it eventually result in remedial exits? At what cost? In other words, are we thinking about the students who don't progress, students in whom a lot was invested?
Parisi identifies part of the problem as the "silo effect" of separable service units within a college/university, each addressing distinct needs. The tutorial model developed at KCC is an academic-driven model modeled on the work of Kathleen Manning et al. This model tailors support to students' actual academic challenges found within the classroom. The tutorial offers a range of support services–counseling; advising, and occasional topic workshops, largely through TRIO–as well as "third space" comfort and social belonging via the studio model. This third space is important, because it is where the classroom experience can be safely re-processed and navigated.
The final speaker is Christie Toth from the University of Utah; her talk is entitled "'Assimilation' in Basic Writing: Learning from Tribal College Faculty and Students." Her presentation focuses on the vexed issue of assimilation in basic writing instruction, specifically in the context of Native American student writers and tribal colleges. She performed an ethnographic case study at Dine' College, which serves the Navajo Nation.
Tribal colleges face many challenges and are a complex site for research and teaching. Toth's takeaways from her research: culture is important, but being focused only on the dangers of cultural assimilation removes us from the importance of teaching academic literacies as a means of challenging colonialism. Toth emphasizes Lyons's concept of rhetorical sovereignty and that teaching academic literacy can be an example of rhetorical sovereignty; she also draws on Heath's critical language awareness. Toth asks us to interrogate settler ideologies in the context of academic language and examine the role of writing in both perpetuating and resisting settler colonialism. She has found recent conversations in translingualism very helpful in understanding these dynamics. At the same time, we must teach students about language variation as rhetorical choices.
Keynote: Grasping the "Phenomenal Forms": A Dialogue on Taking Action in Basic Writing
The CBW Workshop keynote presentation is being given jointly by Deborah Mutnick of Long Island University and Shannon Carter of Texas A&M Commerce. These two scholars' work is well-known in basic writing circles, and both have given much to CBW as an organization.
The theme of this joint keynote is the relationship between surface realities and underlying social structures and the implications for the teaching and learning of writing. Guiding questions: How do we foster critical consciousness in the classroom? How do we foster students' sense of agency? How can teachers help students overcome obstacles to learning?
They will return to two case studies in their previously published work–"Joe" in Mutnick's Writing in an Alien World and "Eric" in Carter's The Way Literacy Lives. Mutnick begins with a discussion of the work of Luis Villacanas de Castro, author of Critical Pedagogy and Marx, Vgotsky, and Freire.
So how do we foster students' sense of agency? Carter gives us her big reveal: "Eric" is her brother. Eric had diverse, significant, and complex literacy practices outside of school, but those literacies were not able to be deployed in school. Eric didn't see these literacies as literacy, either–the "real" writing was done in school. What he did outside of school wasn't writing, in his view. Carter argues that school-based literacies have become so entrenched that only they are seen as literacy, while a wide range of literacy practices used outside of school are dismissed and ignored as not literacy. What Carter wants for Eric and all students is rhetorical dexterity: the ability to read, compose, and negotiate across linguistic codes. Mutnick then briefly discusses"Joe Baxter" from her book. Joe inspired the title of her book when he wrote a paper that asked, "Blacks in Science Fiction: Why Are We Invisible in an Alien World?"
How can teachers help students overcome obstacles to learning? We can practice Freirean conscientizacao or "critical consciousness." We can engage in egalitarian, democratic dialogue, not because we want to be "nice" to students or even "democratic," but because students needs democratic dialogue in order to grow intellectually. We as teachers needs to create the culture for students to transition into active intellectuals.
We must also engage in participatory action research. Rhetorical dexterity combined with participatory action research may help students engage with the phenomenal forms that impact their lives. We must create contexts through dialogue and participatory research in which students can take their own daily lives as the object of their reflection process.
The Action of Emerging Scholars
This session is devoted to poster presentations by graduate students, who are showcasing their research-in-progress.
The first poster presentation is by Erika Johnson of Texas Woman's University. Her project is entitled "The 'Problem' of Pronouns: 'I,' 'You,' and 'We' All Argue." Erika contends that instead of seeing students' pronoun usage as evidence of error, we should see this usage as arguments and strategies by which students are attempting to write themselves into various arguments and texts.
Our second poster presentation is by Justin King Rademaekers from West Chester University, focusing on WCU's placement system. Their writing program has tried to combine elements of self-directed placement and accelerated learning programs (ALP).
The final poster presentation is from Leonara Anyango-Kivuva of Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Her work focuses on English Language Learners (ELLs), and she begins by stressing that while BW and ELL scholars don't often interact, she feels very comfortable in this room, listening to conversations that touch on issues she deals with every day. There is more overlap in our scholarship that we sometimes acknowledge.
Her presentation is titled "Writing Journeys, Writing Selves," and discusses the writing of Burundian refugees. This subject is the focus of her dissertation research, which she recently defended (congratulations!).
CBW INNY Award Presentation
This year's winner of CBW's award for innovation (known as the INNY) is the writing program at Boise State University. Heidi Estrem, Dawn Shepherd, and Karen Uehling are presenting how they changed Boise State's placement system.
Heidi begins by asking the audience to identify potential questions or issues we have about program policy or institutional process at our home institutions. She then continued by describing the limitations of Boise State's then-current placement program, which was mandated by the state; every public institution in Idaho had to use the same system. This was a problem, for reasons that are obvious to any writing instructor–different student populations, different needs.
What Boise State did: created consensus and commitment by writing a whitepaper; found their allies by canvassing/meeting with stakeholders at each campus in Idaho; kept an open mind and developed a specific target and deliverables; created pilot projects and pushed for evidence-based placement; and kept the momentum going.
Karen Uehling is now discussing how the basic writing course structure changed at Boise State. The new model is called English 101 PLUS. (101+?)
The Idaho State Board of Education adopted "Complete College Idaho," a corporate model. The Boise State WPAs were never able to get their stretch course to be credit-bearing, which was a huge source of frustration since this program was very successful. When the process of change the course curriculum began, it was difficult, as the stretch program worked well and instructors loved the course.
How Boise State revised its program: Reviewed "Complete College Idaho" options and selected the ALP approach. Planned new course with current stretch instructors and piloted a new course. Found allies and wrote a grant proposal for course and faculty development, not only for Boise State, but also the College of Western Idaho, Boise State's sister community college.
New course ran in Fall 2013. They now have a for-credit English 101+ course and a three-hour English 101 course. This process gave the writing instructors a voice and input into the changes in the writing program.Karen wraps up by saying,"We are teaching the students, we care about them, we SHOULD have a voice in what we're doing."
Dawn Shepherd is now discussing the curricular change, which was prompted by general education reform at Boise State; new university learning outcomes; and research in the field on threshold concepts and writing transfer. Those affected by the curriculum change include students, FYW instructors, a second-year course (UF 200) that is writing intensive; and the instructors of the Communication in the Disciplines course, offered by every department on campus. Quotes Chuck Paine: "If you don't get buy in, don't do it."
What Boise State did: used a quilting metaphor that honored a feminist conception of collaborative work; developed a "survey that helped make connections between local values, current pedagogies, and new research in the field; slowed the process down to allow for processing, which included coffee talks; instructors were given $5 Starbucks gift cards so they could meet in dyads and talk over the changes; and writing groups were formed. During 2016-17, the curriculum will continue to be developed through experimentation and pilot projects.
The discussion then returns to the audience's institutional context. The audience is identifying their stakeholders and choosing one to identify values, attitudes, and assumptions. The audience is asked, when you return to your institution, what is one action you can take? The audience then does a write-pair-share activity.
For more information, the Boise State writing program has compiled resources on Google Drive at https://goo.gl/y0SJka.
Accelerated Learning Accessibility Basic Writing e-Journal Basic Writing Projects & Initiatives Calls to Action CBW-L CBW 2011 CBW 2012 CBW 2013 CBW 2015 CBW 2016 CBW 2017 CBW 2018 CBW2019 CBW Exec Board CBW Fellowship CBW Innovations Award CBW Resource Share Site CCCC CCCC 2011 CCCC 2012 CCCC 2013 CCCC 2015 CCCC 2016 CCCC 2017 CCCC2019 Contingent Labor Digital Literacy Fun! History of Basic Writing In the News Journal of Basic Writing Mission Statement National Survey of Basic Writing Politics of Remediation Professional Developmwnt Publishing Race Relationship to First Year Comp Resources Scholarship of Basic Writing Sense of the House Motion Social Media Submissions Teaching Tech Uncategorized What's New in Basic Writing What Is Basic Writing? Who is Basic Writing?
Archives Select Month March 2019 (9) January 2019 (4) March 2018 (4) March 2017 (1) November 2016 (1) April 2016 (9) March 2016 (2) January 2016 (4) March 2015 (2) September 2014 (2) March 2014 (3) September 2013 (1) May 2013 (2) March 2013 (36) February 2013 (2) January 2013 (1) December 2012 (2) October 2012 (1) July 2012 (1) April 2012 (1) March 2012 (34) February 2012 (6) January 2012 (1) October 2011 (5) August 2011 (2) July 2011 (2) May 2011 (1) April 2011 (28) March 2011 (4) August 2010 (3) March 2010 (4) November 2009 (2) July 2009 (1) March 2009 (3)
The Council on Basic… on Workshop Redux: Reconsidering…
Deb Culbertson, Prof… on J.37 Fostering Reading Identit…
Bedford Bits: Ideas… on "We Can't Afford t…
mmaune on …
Sara on A.17: There's Nothing Ba…
Leigh on A.17: There's Nothing Ba…
Heather Springer on Small Groups!
4C13 from afar: Twit… on Questions and Answer Session w…
Nancy M. Staub on Question and Answer Session Fo…
Nancy M. Staub on "We Can't Afford t…


text:
Innate immunity and inflammation (1)
Brief Definitive Report (2)
Cyril Seillet
Androgen signaling negatively controls group 2 innate lymphoid cells
2017: The Year in Experimental Medicine
Sophie Laffont, Eve Blanquart, Magali Savignac, Claire Cénac, Gilles Laverny, Daniel Metzger, Jean-Philippe Girard, Gabrielle T. Belz, Lucette Pelletier, Cyril Seillet, Jean-Charles Guéry
Prevalence of asthma is higher in women than in men, but the mechanisms underlying this sex bias are unknown. Group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) are key regulators of type 2 inflammatory responses. Here, we show that ILC2 development is greatly influenced by male sex hormones. Male mice have reduced numbers of ILC2 progenitors (ILC2Ps) and mature ILC2s in peripheral tissues compared with females. In consequence, males exhibit reduced susceptibility to allergic airway inflammation in response to environmental allergens and less severe IL-33–driven lung inflammation, correlating with an impaired expansion of lung ILC2s. Importantly, orchiectomy, but not ovariectomy, abolishes the sex differences in ILC2 development and restores IL-33–mediated lung inflammation. ILC2Ps express the androgen receptor (AR), and AR signaling inhibits their differentiation into mature ILC2s. Finally, we show that hematopoietic AR expression limits IL-33–driven lung inflammation through a cell-intrinsic inhibition of ILC2 expansion. Thus, androgens play a crucial protective role in type 2 airway inflammation by negatively regulating ILC2 homeostasis, thereby limiting their capacity to expand locally in response to IL-33.
Nfil3 is required for the development of all innate lymphoid cell subsets
Cyril Seillet, Lucille C. Rankin, Joanna R. Groom, Lisa A. Mielke, Julie Tellier, Michael Chopin, Nicholas D. Huntington, Gabrielle T. Belz, Sebastian Carotta
Innate lymphoid cell (ILC) populations protect against infection and are essential for lymphoid tissue formation and tissue remodeling after damage. Nfil3 is implicated in the function of adaptive immune lineages and NK cell development, but it is not yet known if Nfil3 regulates other innate lymphoid lineages. Here, we identify that Nfil3 is essential for the development of Peyer's patches and ILC2 and ILC3 subsets. Loss of Nfil3 selectively reduced Peyer's patch formation and was accompanied by impaired recruitment and distribution of lymphocytes within the patches. ILC subsets exhibited high Nfil3 expression and genetic deletion of Nfil3 severely compromised the development of all subsets. Subsequently, Nfil3−/− mice were highly susceptible to disease when challenged with inflammatory or infectious agents. Thus, we demonstrate that Nfil3 is a key regulator of the development of ILC subsets essential for immune protection in the lung and gut.
Langerhans cells are generated by two distinct PU.1-dependent transcriptional networks
Michaël Chopin, Cyril Seillet, Stéphane Chevrier, Li Wu, Hongsheng Wang, Herbert C. Morse, III, Gabrielle T. Belz, Stephen L. Nutt
Langerhans cells (LCs) are the unique dendritic cells found in the epidermis. While a great deal of attention has focused on defining the developmental origins of LCs, reports addressing the transcriptional network ruling their differentiation remain sparse. We addressed the function of a group of key DC transcription factors—PU.1, ID2, IRF4, and IRF8—in the establishment of the LC network. We show that although steady-state LC homeostasis depends on PU.1 and ID2, the latter is dispensable for bone marrow–derived LCs. PU.1 controls LC differentiation by regulating the expression of the critical TGF-β responsive transcription factor RUNX3. PU.1 directly binds to the Runx3 regulatory elements in a TGF-β–dependent manner, whereas ectopic expression of RUNX3 rescued LC differentiation in the absence of PU.1 and promoted LC differentiation from PU.1-sufficient progenitors. These findings highlight the dual molecular network underlying LC differentiation, and show the central role of PU.1 in these processes.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


I really need to speak with you on the phone. What's your number?
It isn't possible to speak with us (Ed and David Hamrick) on the phone.
We have hundreds of thousands of customers, and the only efficient way we can provide support to our customers is to do it by e-mail.


At the skate park three teenage lads were doing stunts on their BMX bikes. As I fumbled around in my bag for one of the children they stopped and watched me from a distance. I set him down on the top of a high wall overlooking the track and beckoned them over. They asked and I explained what I was doing, hoping to evoke wonder, but they shrugged. Then I suggested that I could take photographs of them jumping the ramps whilst the figure looked on and they agreed. He watched, from the shade of the urban shrubbery, as the cyclists jumped and twirled. When I thanked them and left they watched me go with a sullen air and I feared for the little one's safety.
But I judged too soon and when I passed a few days later the child still gazed across the tracks watching the everyday dramas of the subculture as the young crowds gathered each evening to smoke and talk, drink and play.
On the fortieth day he was no longer on the wall, but had fallen amongst the bushes. Whilst the skaters and bikers rode and rumbled across the tracks I pushed my way through the undergrowth to find him. The trunks and branches tangled and I stretched myself out to reach him until I was full length on the ground with my fingertips straining for his fallen body. Branches scratched my face and I could feel the damp soaking through my jeans where my knees pressed into the soil.
It puzzled me why, on a dry day there was so much mud and then the stench and the realisation struck me that I was lying on the ground in dirt and piss. I shuffled and stretched to grasp the fallen child before struggling to me feet, smeared with the filthy earth and hoping that none of the skater boys had seen my scramble through their makeshift WC.
But the child was safe, if just a little battered like my pride. 40 days watching a community then falling, forgotten, into their piss/mud to provoke the wilderness question of how the hell did I end up here?
When I left him high up on the rocks looking out over the Peak District I didn't think he would last long. He gazed across the valley into the mist of February winter looking so peaceful and as I walked away I felt guilty that I had consigned him to oblivion. Of all the children he was, by far, the most exposed.
The most exposed but also the one with the most spectacular vista to spend his 40 days, there was defiance in him, he wasn't hiding in a rock cleft or tucked away in the detritus of the city – he was there for the whole universe to see.
When I lay in bed with the sleet and rain tapping on the window he was the one of the 40 I thought of. Alone in the dark with nothing to protect him from the wind that could take him or the snow that could smother him or the rain that could drench him and return him to the earth.
So, 40 days later, I chased up the hillside out of breath and scrambling over rocks. I expected to find the large boulder empty, as if I'd offered him up on an altar and the gods had taken him. But they hadn't, and for 40 days he had remained. But now changed, transformed by his exposure to become one with the rock. With delight I tentatively touched the rough clay. He had held that gaze for 40 days and nights as the damp and the rain moulded and shaped him to become part of the landscape.
His waiting has softened him and so his defiant stance is gone. But now, grey as the stone, all that remains of him seems infused with the wisdom of ages.


The aim of the program is to train Information Technology professionals who can perform the development, creation, application, implementation, and operation of IT systems either individually or as a team member at advanced level. Furthermore, it provides the cooperative and modelling skills required to solve and research IT related problems, and ensures solid theoretical background to pursue PhD studies.
The graduates are able to use problem solving techniques in the design and implementation of enterprise resource planning systems; to apply state of the art modelling techniques; and to design, implement, and operate decision support systems.
Main subjects: Advanced Programming, Graph Theory, Automata and Formal Languages, Application of Linear Programming, Advanced Image Processing, Online Algorithms, Machine Learning, Advanced Graphics Algorithms, Program Systems Development, Advanced Approximate and Symbolic Computing, Logic and Functional Programming. Analysis, Game theory, Nonlinear Programming, Data Mining, Image Registration, Embedded Systems, Parallel Programming, Software Development, Computer Vision, Distributed Application Development, Network Science.
Bank Address: HU-1054 Budapest, Hold utca 4.
All bank expenses have to be paid by the applicant.
A. At least BSc degree in Computer Science or close equivalent.
a. Copy of the BSc degree (notarized English translation).
b. Official full transcripts of your Bachelor studies (notarized English translation).
Note that the applicant might be requested to send all the detailed course syllabuses.
C. Copy of the passport.
Relevant page(s) where passport number, name, photo and date of expiry are visible.
(not older than 1 month).
E. Up-to-date curriculum vitae (no longer than 2 pages).
Optionally, two recommendation letters from recognised academic persons.
F. An evidence of payment of 200 USD non-refundable application fee.
b. or requested to take extra lectures at the beginning of a semester to acquire the necessary knowledge.
Applicants with less than 30 credits from the list given in G ) cannot be accepted to the MSc program.
further extras: publication, participation in competitions, etc (max 10 points).
Only applicants obtaining at least 50 points can be accepted.


The Reading Fightin' Phils have been the Philadelphia Phillies Double-A minor league affiliates since their founding all the way back in 1968 when they were simply named the Reading Phillies.
The relationship between the two teams is tied for the longest minor league affiliation in baseball.
In 2008 the Philadelphia Phillies ownership outright purchased the Reading club, and the nickname was changed for the 2013 season.
Often simply known as the "Fightins", the Reading team is the oldest in the Eastern League still playing in their original city. The club has played its home games at FirstEnergy Stadium, which was built in 1951 and was originally known as Reading Municipal Stadium, for its entire history.
Reading, Pennsylvania has been nicknamed "Baseballtown" as its relationship to organized baseball goes back to at least 1858 and the Reading Athletic Club. The city is located approximately 70 miles northwest of the Philadelphia area. Depending on where you are coming from, traffic conditions, and the route you take, it is about an hour-and-a-half to two-hour drive usually utilizing I-76.
The Fightin' Phils went 64-73 this season, finishing in fourth place in the Eastern Division of the Eastern League. Their manager is 58-year-old Greg Legg, a 22nd round draft pick of the Phillies way back in 1982. Legg would reach the big-leagues, playing in parts of the 1986 and 1987 seasons with the Phillies.
This year's Reading Fightin' Phils Player of the Year is pitcher JoJo Romero. A native of Oxnard, California, the 6-0, 190lb left-hander was taken by the Phillies with their fourth-round selection in the 2016 MLB Amateur Draft out of Yavapai College in Arizona.
Romero had his season cut short due to an oblique injury, but still made 18 starts for the Fightins. He went 7-6 with a 3.80 ERA and a 1.294 WHIP, allowing 97 hits over 106.2 innings with a 100/41 K:BB ratio.
He currently ranks #5 on the Phillies Top Prospects list by MLB.com, where they show him as throwing five different pitches: fastball, cutter, changeup, slider, and curveball. Each of his offerings are graded out at 50 or higher, with his fastball receiving a 60 grade.
"…improved stuff, along with his command, make him a much better pitching prospect overall. His four-seam fastball was up to 95 mph all year, including his final start of 2017 against Blue Jays super-prospects Vladimir Guerrero Jr and Bo Bichette, while his sinking 90-93 mph two-seamer generates a lot of weak contact on the ground. Depending on the report, he has as many as four secondary pitches. His changeup and cutter have the chance to be plus pitches, while he has a distinct average slider that is a bit ahead of his curveball. He fills the strike zone with all of them consistently."
Romero put together his strong season after getting off to a horrendous start. Over his first seven outings the lefty went 0-4 with a 6.38 ERA, allowing 43 hits over 36.2 innings. Opposing batters were hitting .291 against him.
After making the adjustments, Romero went 7-2 over his final 11 outings with just a .212 batting average against. He allowed just 54 hits over 70 innings with a 69/22 K:BB ratio during that ending stretch to his season. That was the stretch that pushed him to this Player of the Year recognition.
Romero should reach Triple-A Lehigh Valley next season. Whether that happens out of spring training or into the season probably depends on his health and his spring performances. That would leave him on the doorstep of a promotion to the Phillies.
All big-league clubs are continually looking for effective left-handers. Rookie southpaw Ranger Suarez made three starts for the Phillies this season, the only three by a left-hander all year. Should Romero stay healthy and continue to mature as expected he will at least be in line for a bullpen shot as early as next summer.
Originally published at Phillies Nation as "Reading Fightin' Phils Player of the Year: JoJo Romero"


text:
"""newsproject URL Configuration

The `urlpatterns` list routes URLs to views. For more information please see:
    https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/topics/http/urls/
Examples:
Function views
    1. Add an import:  from my_app import views
    2. Add a URL to urlpatterns:  url(r'^$', views.home, name='home')
Class-based views
    1. Add an import:  from other_app.views import Home
    2. Add a URL to urlpatterns:  url(r'^$', Home.as_view(), name='home')
Including another URLconf
    1. Add an import:  from blog import urls as blog_urls
    2. Add a URL to urlpatterns:  url(r'^blog/', include(blog_urls))
"""
from django.contrib.auth import views
from django.conf.urls import include, url
from django.contrib import admin
from news import views

urlpatterns = [
    url(r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)),
    url(r'^news/', include('news.urls')),
    url(r'^facebook/posts', views.FacebookPostView.as_view(), name='facebook_posts'),
    url(r'^tracked/', views.TrackedWordView.as_view(), name='tracked_words'),
    url(r'^$', views.articles_list, name='homepage')
]

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
US Finanzminister Geithner: Stellungnahme vor Finanzausschuss
26. März 2009 Schlesinger jr. USA
"Die US-Regierung plant eine massive Verschärfung der Finanzmarktkontrollen, um in Zukunft eine Wiederholung der Finanzkrise zu verhindern.
Im Mittelpunkt soll eine strengere Überwachung der Märkte für hochspekulative und riskante Derivate stehen und die Vollmacht, neben Banken auch Versicherungen oder Hedgefonds verstaatlichen zu können. Finanzminister Timothy Geithner plant zudem eine Regulierungsbehörde, die Finanzunternehmen, wie Hedgefonds genauer unter die Lupe nehmen kann.
Außerdem sollen sich Hedgefonds bei der Börsenaufsicht SEC registrieren lassen müssen. Dies wurde am Donnerstag (26.03.2009) aus Regierungskreisen in Washington bekannt." (DW)
US Finanzminister Timothy Geithner hat seinen Rettungsplan vor dem Finanzausschuss des Repräsentantenhauses dargelegt (26.03.2009).
Hier das Original als Quelle:
Thank you Chairman Frank, Ranking Member Bachus, and other members of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify about the critical topic of financial regulatory reform.
Over the past 18 months, we have faced the most severe global financial crisis in generations. Some of the world's largest financial institutions have failed. Equity and real estate prices have fallen sharply, eroding the value of our savings. The supply of credit has tightened dramatically. Confidence in the overall financial system, in the protections it is supposed to afford for investors and consumers, has eroded. These financial pressures have intensified the recession now underway around the world.
And as in any financial crisis, the damage falls on Main Street. It affects the vulnerable. It affects those who were conservative and responsible, not just those who took too much risk.
Our system is wrapped today in extraordinary complexity, but beneath all that, financial systems serve an essential and basic function. Financial institutions and markets transform the earnings and savings of American workers into the loans that finance a home, a new car or a college education. They exist to allocate savings and investment to their most productive uses.
Our financial system does this better than any other financial system in the world, but our system failed in basic fundamental ways. The system proved too unstable and fragile, subject to significant crises every few years, periodic booms in real estate markets and in credit, followed by busts and contraction. Innovation and complexity overwhelmed the checks and balances in the system. Compensation practices rewarded short-term profits over long-term return. We saw huge gains in increased access to credit for large parts of the American economy, but those gains were overshadowed by pervasive failures in consumer protection, leaving many Americans with obligations they did not understand and could not sustain. The huge apparent returns to financial activity attracted fraud on a dramatic scale. Large amounts of leverage and risk were created both within and outside the regulated part of the financial system.
These failures have caused a great loss of confidence in the basic fabric of our financial system, a system that over time has been a tremendous asset for the American economy.
To address this will require comprehensive reform. Not modest repairs at the margin, but new rules of the game. The new rules must be simpler and more effectively enforced and produce a more stable system, that protects consumers and investors, that rewards innovation and that is able to adapt and evolve with changes in the financial market.
On February 25, after meeting with the banking and financial services leadership from Congress, President Obama directed his economic team to develop recommendations for financial regulatory reform and to begin the process of working with the Congress on new legislation. The Treasury Department has been working with the President's Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG) to develop a comprehensive plan of reform. This effort has been and will be guided by principles the President set forth earlier this year and in his speech as a candidate at Cooper Union in March 2008.
Financial institutions and markets that are critical to the functioning of the financial system and that could pose serious risks to the stability of the financial system need to be subject to strong oversight by the government. Our financial system and the major centralized markets must be strong and resilient enough to withstand very severe shocks and the failure of one or more large institutions.
We need much stronger standards for openness, transparency, and plain, common sense language throughout the financial system. And we need strong and uniform supervision for all financial products marketed to consumers and investors, and tough enforcement of the rules to ensure full accountability for those who violate the public trust.
Financial products and institutions should be regulated for the economic function they provide and the risks they present, not the legal form they take. We can't allow institutions to cherry pick among competing regulators, and shift risk to where it faces the lowest standards and constraints.
And we need to recognize that risk does not respect national borders. We need to prevent national competition to reduce standards and encourage a race to higher standards. Markets are global and high standards at home need to be complemented by strong international standards enforced more evenly and fairly. These are global markets and challenges. Building on these principles, we want to work with Congress to put in place fundamental reforms that create a stronger, more stable system, with much stronger protections for consumers and investors, and a more streamlined, consolidated, and simple oversight framework.
I want to begin that process today by focusing on proposals that are essential to creating a more stable system, with stronger tools to prevent and manage future crises. In this context, my objective is to concentrate on the substance of the reform agenda, rather than the complex and sensitive questions of who should be responsible for what.
Over the next few weeks we will outline proposals in the areas of consumer and investor protection and for reform of regulatory oversight arrangements.
We start with systemic risk, not just because of its obvious importance to our future economic performance, but also because these issues require more cooperation globally, and they will be at the center of the agenda at the upcoming Leaders' Summit of the G-20 in London on April 2.
These proposals reflect a range of complex and consequential policy choices. They will require careful work and drafting. It is important that we get this right. We recognize there will be many alternative models put forth to achieve the objective we all share of creating a more stable system. And we look forward to working with the Federal Reserve, with the agencies that make up the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, and with the Congress on a package of reforms that we can all support.
The Crisis and Its Fundamental Causes
The current crisis had many causes.
Two decades of sustained economic growth bred widespread complacency among financial intermediaries and investors, lowering borrowing costs and weakening lending standards.
A global boom in savings resulted in large flows of capital into the United States and other markets, pushing down long-term interest rates and pushing up asset prices. The rising market hid Ponzi schemes and other flagrant abuses that should have been detected and eliminated.
In that environment, institutions and investors looked for higher returns by taking on greater exposure to the risk of infrequent but severe losses.
A long period of home price appreciation encouraged borrowers, lenders, and investors to make choices that could only succeed if home prices continued to appreciate. We had a system under which firms encouraged people to take unwise risks on complicated products, with ruinous results for them and for our financial system.
Market discipline failed to constrain dangerous levels of risk-taking throughout the financial system. New financial products were created to meet demand from investors, and the complexity outmatched the risk-management capabilities of even the most sophisticated financial institutions. Financial activity migrated outside the banking system, relying on the assumption that liquidity would always be available.
Regulated institutions held too little capital relative to the risks to which they were exposed. And the combined effects of the requirements for capital, reserves and liquidity amplified rather than dampened financial cycles. This worked to intensify the boom and magnify the bust.
Supervision and regulation failed to prevent these problems. There were failures where regulation was extensive and failures where it was absent.
Regulators were aware that a large share of loans made by banks and other lenders were being originated for distribution to investors through securitizations, but they did not identify the risks caused by explosive growth in complex products based on these products.
Investment banks, large insurance companies, finance companies, and the GSEs were subject to only limited oversight on a consolidated basis, despite the fact that many of those companies owned federally insured depository institutions or had other access to explicit or implicit forms of support from the government. Federal law allowed many institutions to choose among regulatory regimes for consolidated supervision and, not surprisingly, they avoided the stronger regulatory authority applicable to bank holding companies. Those companies and others were highly leveraged or used short-term borrowing to buy long-term assets, yet lacked strong federal prudential regulation and routine access to central bank liquidity.
And while supervision and regulation failed to constrain the build up of leverage and risk, the United States came into this crisis without adequate tools to manage it effectively. Until the Housing and Economic Recovery Act and the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act were passed in the summer and fall of 2008, the executive branch had effectively no ability to provide the capital or guarantees necessary to contain the damage caused by the crisis.
And as I discussed before this committee on Tuesday, U.S. law left regulators without good options for managing failures of systemically important non-bank financial institutions.
Regulation of a financial system as complex and dynamic as our system is inherently difficult and challenging. But that difficulty has been compounded by a U.S. regulatory structure that is unnecessarily complex and fragmented. The complexity has sometimes resulted in a failure to assign clear responsibility for achievement of some public policy objectives, notably for financial stability.
Toward a More Stable and Resilient Financial System
Our comprehensive framework for regulatory reform will cover four broad areas: systemic risk, consumer and investor protection, eliminating gaps in our regulatory structure; and international coordination.
In the coming weeks, I will present detailed frameworks for each of these areas. Today, I will discuss in greater detail the need to create tools to identify and mitigate systemic risk, including tools to protect the financial system from the failure of systemically important financial institutions.
Second, weaknesses in our consumer and investor protections harm individuals, undermine trust in our financial system, and can contribute to systemic crises that shake the very foundations of our financial system. The choice of what home mortgage to get or how to save for retirement are some of the most important financial decisions that households make. It is crucial that when households make choices we have clear rules of the road that prevent manipulation and abuse. We must restore integrity to our financial system and strengthen these protections.
Consumer and investor protection is a critical component of the President's regulatory reform plan. We are developing a strong, comprehensive plan for consumer and investor regulation to simplify financial decisions for households and to protect people from unfair and deceptive practices. We must end the practice of allowing banks and other financial companies to choose their regulator simply by changing their charters; regulators must choose who to regulate. Moreover, our regulatory system must be comprehensive and eliminate gaps in coverage. Our regulatory structure must assign clear regulatory authority, resources, and accountability for each of the key regulatory functions. We must not let turf wars or concerns about the shape of organizational charts prevent us from establishing a substantive system of regulation that meets the needs of the American people.
To match the increasing global markets, we must ensure that global standards for financial regulation are consistent with the high standards we will be implementing in the United States.
The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) has played an essential role in the effort, working with the world's standard – setting bodies to study the underlying causes of the crises and address these weaknesses. Much progress is being made to enhance sound regulation, strengthen transparency, and reinforce international collaboration.
We have begun to work with international colleagues to reform and strengthen the FSF so that it can play a more effective role alongside the original Bretton Woods institutions in strengthening the financial system. We have already gotten agreement to expand the membership to include all G-20 countries, giving it a stronger mandate for promoting more robust standards consistent with the principles above, and working with the IMF and the World Bank to monitor the implementation of those standards.
In addition, we will launch a new, initiative to address prudential supervision, tax havens, and money laundering issues in weakly regulated jurisdictions. President Obama will underscore in London on April 2 at the Leaders' Summit the imperative of raising standards across the globe and encouraging a race to the top rather than a race to the bottom.
Reducing Systemic Risk
The crisis of the past 18 months has exposed critical gaps and weaknesses in our regulatory system. As risks built up, internal risk management systems, rating agencies and regulators simply did not understand or address critical behaviors until they had already resulted in catastrophic losses.
This crisis has made clear that certain large, interconnected firms and markets need to be under a more consistent, and more conservative regulatory regime. These standards cannot simply address the soundness of individual institutions, but must also ensure the stability of the system itself. We need to strengthen our system of prudential supervision across the financial sector. We must require that firms build up capital during good economic times so that they have a more robust protection against losses in down times – and can continue to lend to America's households and businesses big and small. We need to examine our accounting rules to see whether, consistent with investor protection, we can require firms to build up loan loss reserves that look forward and account for losses in downturns.
In addition, regulators must issue standards for executive compensation practices across all financial firms. These guidelines should encourage prudent risk-taking, incent a focus on long-term performance of the firm rather than short-term profits, and should not otherwise create incentives that overwhelm risk management frameworks.
The key elements of our plan to address systemic risk are:
First, we need to establish a single entity with responsibility for systemic stability over the major institutions and critical payment and settlement systems and activities.
Second, we need to establish and enforce substantially more conservative capital requirements for institutions that pose potential risk to the stability of the financial system, that are designed to dampen rather than amplify financial cycles.
Third, we should require that leveraged private investment funds with assets under management over a certain threshold register with the SEC to provide greater capacity for protecting investors and market integrity.
Fourth, we should establish a comprehensive framework of oversight, protections and disclosure for the OTC derivatives market, moving the standardized parts of those markets to central clearinghouse, and encouraging further use of exchange-traded instruments.
Fifth, the SEC should develop strong requirements for money market funds to reduce the risk of rapid withdrawals of funds that could pose greater risks to market functioning.
And sixth, we need to establish a stronger resolution mechanism that gives the government tools to protect the financial system and the broader economy from the potential failure of large complex financial institutions.
Systemically Important Financial Firms and Markets
To ensure appropriate focus and accountability for financial stability we need to establish a single entity with responsibility for consolidated supervision of systemically important firms and for systemically important payment and settlement systems and activities.
We can no longer allow major financial institutions to choose among consolidated supervision regimes and regulators or to avoid consolidated supervision entirely. That means we must create higher standards for all systemically important financial firms regardless of whether they own a depository institution, to account for the risk that the distress or failure of such a firm could impose on the financial system and the economy. We will work with Congress to enact legislation that defines the characteristics of covered firms, sets objectives and principles for their oversight, and assigns responsibility for regulating these firms.
In identifying systemically important firms, we believe that the characteristics to be considered should include: the financial system's interdependence with the firm, the firm's size, leverage (including off-balance sheet exposures), and degree of reliance on short-term funding, and the firm's the importance of the firm as a source of credit for households, businesses, and governments and as a source of liquidity for the financial system.
In general, the design and degree of conservatism of the prudential requirements applicable to such firms should take into account the inherent inability of regulators to predict future outcomes.
Capital requirements for these firms must be sufficiently robust to be effective farther into the tails of potential outcomes than capital requirements for other financial firms. And they must be less pro-cyclical, requiring firms to build up substantial capital buffers in good economic times so that they can avoid deleveraging in cyclical downturns.
The single systemic regulator will also need to impose liquidity, counterparty, and credit risk management requirements that are more stringent than for other financial firms. For instance, supervisors should apply more demanding liquidity constraints; and require that these firms are able to aggregate counterparty risk exposures on an enterprise basis within a matter of hours.
The regulator of these entities will also need a prompt, corrective action regime that would allow the regulator to force protective actions as regulatory capital levels decline, similar to that of the FDIC with respect to its covered agencies.
Payment and Settlement Activities
Weaknesses in the settlement systems for key funding and risk transfer markets, notably overnight and short-term lending markets (such as those for tri-party repurchase agreements) and OTC derivatives, have been highlighted as a key mechanism that could spread financial distress between institutions and across borders. While some progress was made in the markets for CDS and other OTC derivatives while I was at the New York Fed, federal authority over such arrangements is incomplete and fragmented, and we have been forced to rely heavily on moral suasion to encourage market participants to strengthen these markets.
We need to give a single entity broad and clear authority over systemically important payment and settlement systems and activities. Where such systems or their participants are already federally regulated, the authority of those federal regulators should be preserved and the single entity should consult and coordinate with those regulators.
Hedge Funds and Other Private Pools of Capital
U. S. law generally does not require hedge funds or other private pools of capital to register with a federal financial regulator, although some funds that trade commodity derivatives must register with the CFTC and many funds register voluntarily with the SEC. As a result, there are no reliable, comprehensive data available to assess whether such funds individually or collectively pose a threat to financial stability. However, in the wake of the Madoff episode it is clear that, in order to protect investors, we must close gaps and weaknesses in regulation of investment advisors and the funds they manage.
Accordingly, we recommend that all advisers to hedge funds (and other private pools of capital, including private equity funds and venture capital funds) with assets under management over a certain threshold be required to register with the SEC. All such funds advised by an SEC-registered investment adviser should be subject to investor and counterparty disclosure requirements and regulatory reporting requirements. The regulatory reporting requirements for such funds should require reporting, on a confidential basis,
information necessary to assess whether the fund or fund family is so large or highly leveraged that it poses a threat to financial stability. The SEC should share the reports that it receives from the funds with the entity responsible for oversight of systemically important firms, which would then determine whether any hedge funds could pose a systemic threat and should be subjected to the prudential standards outlined above.
Credit Default Swaps and Other OTC Derivatives
The current financial crisis has been amplified by excessive risk-taking by certain insurance companies and poor counterparty credit risk management by many banks trading Credit Default Swaps (CDS) on asset-backed securities. These complex instruments were poorly understood by counterparties, and the implication that they could threaten the entire financial system or bring down a company of the size and scope of AIG was not identified by regulators, in part because the CDS markets lacked transparency.
Let me be clear: the days when a major insurance company could bet the house on credit default swaps with no one watching and no credible backing to protect the company or taxpayers from losses must end.
In our proposed regulatory system, the government will regulate the markets for credit default swaps and over-the-counter derivatives for the first time.
We will subject all dealers in OTC derivative markets and any other firms whose activities in those markets pose a systemic threat to a strong regulatory and supervisory regime as systemically important firms.
We will force all standardized OTC derivative contracts to be cleared through appropriately designed central counterparties (CCPs). We will also encourage greater use of exchange-traded instruments.
The CCPs will be subject to comprehensive settlement systems supervision and oversight, consistent with the authority outlined above.
We will require that all non-standardized derivatives contracts be reported to trade repositories and be subject to robust standards for documentation and confirmation of trades, netting, collateral and margin practices, and close-out practices.
We will bring unparalleled transparency to the OTC derivatives markets by requiring CCPs and trade repositories to make aggregate data on trading volumes and positions available to the public and make individual counterparty trade and position data available on a confidential basis to federal regulators, including those with responsibilities for market integrity.
Finally, we will strengthen participant eligibility requirements and, where appropriate, introduce disclosure or suitability requirements, and we will require all market participants to meet recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Money Market Mutual Funds (MMFs)
In the wake of Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy, we learned that even one of the most stable and least risky investment vehicles – money market mutual funds – was not safe from the failure of a systemically important institution. These funds are subject to strict regulation by the SEC and are billed as having a stable asset value – a dollar invested will always return the same amount. But when a major prime MMF "broke the buck" – lost money – the event sparked sharp withdrawals across the entire prime MMF industry. Those withdrawals resulted in severe liquidity pressures, not only on prime MMFs but also on financial and non-financial companies that relied significantly on MMFs for funding. The vulnerability of MMFs to breaking the buck and the susceptibility of the entire prime MMF industry to sharp withdrawals in such circumstances remains a significant source of systemic risk.
We believe that the SEC should strengthen the regulatory framework around MMFs in order to reduce the credit and liquidity risk profile of individual MMFs and to make the MMF industry as a whole is less susceptible to runs.
Resolution Authority
As I discussed on Tuesday, we must create a resolution regime that provides authority to avoid the disorderly liquidation of any nonbank financial firm whose disorderly liquidation would have serious adverse effects on the financial system or the U.S. economy.
Please note that the draft resolution legislation we have submitted is a first step intended to address a significant void in today's regulatory structure. This mechanism is intended to be a permanent authority and therefore, will also be a critical element of Treasury's broader regulatory reform proposals. As we move forward on those proposals, we will need to align the draft legislation with the broader regulatory reform effort as it develops. At this point, however, I will focus on how the authority and mechanism would work within our current regulatory framework.
We must cover financial institutions that have the potential to pose systemic risks to our economy but that are not currently subject to the resolution authority of the FDIC. This would include bank and thrift holding companies and holding companies that control broker-dealers, insurance companies, and futures commission merchants, or any other financial firm posing substantial risk to our economy.
Before any of the emergency measures specified could be taken, the Secretary of the Treasury, upon the positive recommendations of both the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC and in consultation with the President, would have to make a triggering determination that (1) the financial institution in question is in danger of becoming insolvent; (2) its insolvency would have serious adverse effects on economic conditions or financial stability in the United States; and (3) taking emergency action as provided for in the law would avoid or mitigate those adverse effects.
The Treasury and the FDIC would decide whether to provide financial assistance to the institution or to put it into conservatorship/receivership. This decision will be informed by the recommendations of the Federal Reserve Board and the appropriate federal regulatory agency (if different from the FDIC). The U.S. government would be permitted to utilize a number of different forms of financial assistance in order to stabilize the institution in question. These include making loans to the financial institution in question, purchasing its obligations or assets, assuming or guaranteeing its liabilities, and purchasing an equity interest in the institution.
This authority is modeled on the resolution authority that the FDIC has under current law with respect to banks and that the Federal Housing Finance Agency has with regard to the GSEs. Here, conservatorships or receiverships aim to minimize the impact of the potential failure of the financial institution on the financial system and consumers as a whole, rather than simply addressing the rights of the institution's creditors as in bankruptcy.
Depending on the circumstances, the FDIC and the Treasury would place the firm into conservatorship with the aim of returning it to private hands or a receivership that would manage the process of winding down the firm. The trustee of the conservatorship or receivership would have broad powers, including to sell or transfer the assets or liabilities of the institution in question, to renegotiate or repudiate the institution's contracts (including with its employees), and to deal with a derivatives book. A conservator would also have the power to fundamentally restructure the institution by, for example, replacing its board of directors and its senior officers. None of these actions would be subject to the approval of the institution's creditors or other stakeholders.
The proposed legislation would create an appropriate mechanism to fund the appropriately limited exercise of the resolution authorities it confers. This could take the form of a mandatory appropriation to the FDIC out of the general fund of the Treasury (subject to all the restrictions on the use of appropriated funds, including apportionments under the Anti-Deficiency Act), and/or through a scheme of assessments, ex ante or ex post, on the financial institutions covered by the legislation. The government would also receive repayment from the redemption of any loans made to the financial institution in question, and from the ultimate sale of any equity interest taken by the government in the institution. The Deposit Insurance Fund will not be used to fund such assistance.
The President has made clear that we will do what is necessary to stabilize the financial system and restore the conditions for economic growth. Working closely with the Congress, we have moved quickly and with forceful action to help get people back to work and the economy growing again. With your help we are also moving to repair the financial system so that it works for, rather than against, recovery.
Comprehensive regulatory reform is critical to these efforts. In the coming days and weeks, we will continue to lay out the steps we must take to protect against systemic risk. We will also lay out a detailed framework for stronger rules to protect consumers and investors against fraud and abuse.
Next week I will join President Obama in London for the G-20 leaders meeting to build support – with the help of other interested nations and strengthened international bodies -for higher global standards for financial regulation.
We are a strong and resilient country. We came into the current crisis without the authority and tools we needed to contain the damage to the economy from the financial crisis. We are moving to ensure that we are equipped with both in the future, and in the process, that we modernize our 20th century regulatory system meet 21st century financial challenges.
— Bigdaddy
(Grafik: US Repräsentantenhaus)
US Rettungspaket: Tanz auf dem Vulkan
Israels IDF: Moralischste Armee der Welt


Here at Hecht Insurance Agency, we have been serving the personal and small business insurance needs of South Florida since 1976. What began with one man and one insurance company has grown into a second generation agency representing dozens of insurance companies and serving thousands of clients. As an independent agency, we have selected a group of strong, reliable insurance companies with which to partner. Since we do not work directly for any insurance companies, you can rest assured that our recommendations are made with your best interest in mind.
As a customer, you may think that all insurance is the same, but from our perspective it is not. Our objective is to listen to you and learn about the things in your life that you would like to protect. Next, it is our job to search the available markets and make suggestions for the right protection at the right price.
We don't just sell insurance. Unlike telephone and internet insurance , our job does not end when the policy is sold. We are your initial point of contact for all things insurance. From billing questions and policy changes to reporting and helping you with a claim, our local staff will do it all for you.


This course on educational planning and management caters to participants from Latin American countries and is conducted in Spanish at IIEP's Office in Buenos Aires. Graduates of the Regional Training Programme in Buenos Aires can go on complete the ATP programme at IIEP in Paris.
40 hours are devoted to the development of a final individual project.
Training programmes at IIEP's Office in Buenos Aires benefit from the extensive experience of IIEP's experts. These experts have conducted several studies regarding education on the Latin American continent, and also help institutions to define new concepts, methodologies, and technologies directly applicable in the field.


text:
Loving and Loathing Vegas (eBook)
Loving and Loathing Vegas
Loving and Loathing Vegas eBook Cover,
written by Lex Chase
Lex Chase
B018RSHA1S
Loving and Loathing Vegas is an eBook written by Lex Chase. In this work the characters Jackson and Vegas are Incubi.
Title: Loving and Loathing Vegas
Author: Lex Chase
Published By: Dreamspinner Press
ASIN: B018RSHA1S
IBSN: 9781634769440
Publishing Date: November 30, 2015
Jackson has loved Vegas since God created Man—literally. As demonic incubi hailing from the Seventh Circle of Hell, Jackson and Vegas have never been anything more than roommates. Now living among humans, they run Eaven, a TripAdvisor-recommended detour-worthy diner famous for its devilishly decadent pies. Business is dead on the holidays, and Jackson will gleefully stab himself with a spatula if he has to clean spotless pots and pans one more time.
For fun—or torture—Vegas makes him a bet that should Jackson win, they take a much-needed vacation. Should he lose, he's doomed to clean out grease traps for all eternity. When the challenge is to fall in love with other people by Christmas, it proves Vegas isn't the least bit interested. But when they find an abandoned baby in the trash, she could be the Christmas miracle to warm Jackson's cynical heart.
The following review was originally published by Tera on her Blog, A Succubi's Tale on June 12, 2016
Being an incubus brings along quite a few problems for Jackson, not the least of which is Vegas, whom he has been connected with forever. Together on Earth, running a little out of the way diner, the two find themselves with a small problem. A baby abandoned, but also relationships strained. The truth will come out, but will it be in time?
Jackson and Vegas are two quite interesting Incubi, with a story that I thought was well told, set up a lot of their background in a short time at the beginning and built on that throughout the story as it unfolded. While they are Incubi, they aren't stereotypically so and it was good to see that. Both have their personalities, their own wants and secrets and watching all of that unfold I think made for a more interesting story.
There are quite a number of minor characters as well, not the least of these being a baby girl left with the two Incubi. She's quite the scene stealer as things go on and when her story is revealed at the end of the work, it made a good deal of sense, even if that felt very rushed in comparison to the rest of the work.
While there is a short hot flash towards the end of the story, it doesn't interfere with all that came before, or after. It doesn't feel out of place, it makes sense to both Jackson and Vegas and it brings a lot of the threads in the work to closure. Overall, the work has a lot of humour in it, reminiscent of a "two men and a baby" theme in a lot of ways and it works well at times. I'm not so sure that the adding of two minor characters made all that much of a difference however. Being that the baby herself was driving a lot of the story, the two minor characters that keep popping up don't add much to the story.
The single thing that gave me the largest pause wasn't the story itself, but the cover. The cover bothers, I'm not sure that the black hands and long black nails really work considering the characters themselves and who they are. There could have been a better choice which doesn't give the impression that the incubi are stereotypical, which they are certainly not.
Well written, though at times the story is a bit confused, a little scattered in focus. Much of that is the situation that Jackson and Vegas find themselves in, but when that goes a little too far over the top then it takes away from what otherwise is a well told and fun story.
Four out of five pitchforks.
A cute, fun story about two souls figuring themselves out when it really matters to them. A bit scattered at times, but otherwise a solid story, well told.
This work in Various Formats at All Romance eBooks.com
Retrieved from "http://succubus.net/wiki/index.php?title=Loving_and_Loathing_Vegas_(eBook)&oldid=39608"


Composit: 73% coupler, 21% polyamide, 6% polyester.
Androgynous silhouettes and a sense of restraint are what define JW Anderson's collections. This green knitted dress is made with thin shoulder straps, a half button fastening, and falls to a midi length with a hard-to-miss metallic-gold foil panel at the hem. Style with unique heels or sandals.


text:
Oxfam's inequality fabrications
Every once in a while, Oxfam likes to talk about inequality in the UK, though God knows what that has to do with famine relief. They invariably twist the facts and they've been doing it again today.
Oxfam have realised that journalists are not familiar with the inequality data and don't know the difference between wealth inequality and income inequality. They have realised that if they write a press release that is merely misleading, over-worked hacks will turn it into a convenient lie.
The reality is that the level of income inequality in Britain is average by European standards and lower than average by global standards. Feel free to check this by looking at data from the World Bank and the Office for National Statistics. The first graph is based on the former and the second graph comes from the latter. Both graphs use the standard Gini coefficient (lower numbers = a more equal distribution of income after taxes and benefits).
As the ONS says:
'Before any taxes and benefits, the UK had one of the highest levels of income inequality in the EU. However, the UK's tax and benefits system appears to be more redistributive than that of many other countries with relatively high pre-tax and benefits inequality, bringing the UK close to the overall EU average for inequality of disposable income.'
The least equal nations are mostly in Central and South America where the Gini coefficient frequently exceeds 50, as compared with 32 in the UK and 26 in the rich world's most equal country, Slovenia. Some ex-Soviet states have lower levels of income inequality than Britain but nearly every African country is less equal than Britain. So too is Russia, Turkey, China and the United States.
Nor is wealth inequality high by international standards. The graph below is based on data from the Credit Suisse report that Oxfam claims to base its figures on.
The Credit Suisse report explicitly says that...
...the pattern of wealth distribution in the United Kingdom is very typical for a developed economy.
All of this might comes as a surprise is you read the BBC's report today which begins as follows:
UK one of the most unequal countries, says Oxfam
The richest 1% of the UK population owns more than 20 times the wealth of the poorest fifth, according to Oxfam.
That made Britain one of the most unequal countries in the developed world and contributed to the vote for Brexit, the charity said.
This is bad journalism but when you look at Oxfam's literature, you can see how the BBC hack got confused. The first line of Oxfam's wafer-thin briefing note says:
The UK is one of the most unequal developed countries in the world
There is a citation for this claim but instead of being a reference to the raw data, it is a reference to an OECD report which has a graph showing the UK with a higher-than-average level of income inequality, though lower than Turkey, Chile, the USA, Mexico and Israel. The OECD report does not claim to a study of 'the developed world'. It is a study of its 35 member states. And its figure for the UK is wrong, presumably because it is old. It gives the UK a Gini of 36 when the real figure is 32. If it was shown correctly, the UK would be bang in the middle.
In any case, the OECD report is about income inequality whereas Oxfam's report is supposedly about wealth inequality. Oxfam get around this by moving seamlessly from talking about income inequality to making some fairly meaningless claims about wealth inequality, like this:
...the richest one percent of the population now owns more than 20 times more wealth than the poorest 20 percent of the population
This is not necessarily untrue, it just doesn't tell you anything useful. The poorest 20 per cent of the population don't own very much. Most people's household wealth is dominated by the value of their house. If you live in a house owned by the government, you are unlikely to have much wealth and if you are in debt you will own no net wealth at all (note that you can be in debt with credit cards, student loans etc. without being poor in any meaningful sense).
The use of the word 'now' in the sentence above implies that the poorest 20 per cent previously had more wealth than they do today, but Oxfam do not provide any evidence for this because there is none. Nor do they compare the UK's wealth distribution with from that of other countries, presumably because - as shown above - there is less inequality of wealth than in many countries, including the sainted social democracies of Scandinavia.
In a blog post written to coincide with Oxfam's press release, one of the charity's numerous policy advisors drops the word 'developed' and explicitly says:
The UK is one of the most unequal nations in the world.
This is a flat out lie. Under no measure is the UK anywhere near being the most unequal nation in the world.
There is currently a debate about 'post-truth politics' in Britain. People rightly get annoyed by fabrications like the £350 million Vote Leave claimed Britain sent the EU every week, but this claim was widely challenged in the media at the time. If you look at the BBC's inequality report you will find no challenge, no rebuttal and no response from anybody who disagrees with Oxfam's warped interpretation of the data. Whether it knows it or not, the BBC is complicit in the fabrication.
The lies of Margaret Chan
We will fight them on the beaches and in the zoos
Outdoor smoking bans
Not news
David Nutt's designer drug
The truth continues to emerge about smoking ban mi...
The victory of vaping
Regulator Watch: Puritans and Prohibitionists
More on that sugar conspiracy
"Calories are the new tobacco"
Day of the jackass
Glantz's sugar conspiracy
The WHO position on e-cigarettes
Back on the crack
Burning our money to ASH
Plain packaging for soft drinks
The NHS as a tool of social control
Bad Habits, Hard Choices by David Fell: a review
Private Eye gets it badly wrong


text:
Аккуаросса () — громада  в Швейцарії в кантоні Тічино, округ Бленіо.

Географія
Громада розташована на відстані близько 130 км на південний схід від Берна, 30 км на північ від Беллінцони.
Аккуаросса має площу 61,8 км², з яких на 3,5% дозволяється будівництво (житлове та будівництво доріг), 21,3% використовуються в сільськогосподарських цілях, 56,1% зайнято лісами, 19,1% не є продуктивними (річки, льодовики або гори).

Демографія
2019 року в громаді мешкало 1813 осіб (-1,5% порівняно з 2010 роком), іноземців було 12,1%. Густота населення становила 29 осіб/км².
За віковим діапазоном населення розподілялося таким чином: 16,7% — особи молодші 20 років, 57% — особи у віці 20—64 років, 26,3% — особи у віці 65 років та старші. Було 840 помешкань (у середньому 2,1 особи в помешканні).
Із загальної кількості 838 працюючих 94 було зайнятих в первинному секторі, 149 — в обробній промисловості, 595 — в галузі послуг.

Примітки

Громади Тічино

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
ŠKODA celebrates its 22 millionth vehicle
The milestone car, a ŠKODA KODIAQ GT, was produced at the Chinese SAIC VOLKSWAGEN plant in Changsha.
World of ŠKODA
+ more results
ŠKODA Brand
ŠKODA Range
Cirque du Soleil®
ŠKODA Genuine Parts
ŠKODA Genuine Accessories
Fleet & Diplomatic Sales
About ŠKODA
Visit ŠKODA
MyŠKODA
Recall Actions
Folow the link
22 millionth vehicle
Today, the 22 millionth ŠKODA vehicle was produced. The milestone vehicle, a ŠKODA KODIAQ GT in Velvet Red, rolled off the production line at the SAIC VOLKSWAGEN plant in Changsha. This Sunday, the vehicle will be presented at the 'ŠKODA Day' which is taking place ahead of this year's Auto Shanghai (16-25 April).
ŠKODA AUTO CEO Bernhard Maier said, "ŠKODA is growing very dynamically. We have sold more than a quarter of all the ŠKODA vehicles produced in our company's 124-year history in the last five years alone. The passing of the 22-million mark is yet another milestone that motivates us to consistently continue this growth. We will be doing this by launching more than 30 new models in the markets by the end of 2022 as part of our product campaign. China will play a crucial role in this: since we entered the Chinese market twelve years ago, ŠKODA AUTO has developed very well there – China is now our largest single market. Our attractive model range as well as our great and trusting collaboration with our long-standing joint venture partner, SAIC VOLKSWAGEN, are the foundations for this success."
ŠKODA AUTO Board Member for Production and Logistics, Michael Oeljeklaus, added, "As part of our growth strategy, we utilise an international and efficient production network. At present, we manufacture at a total of 16 sites in nine countries. The fact that our 22 millionth vehicle was produced in China is also proof of the ŠKODA brand's successful internationalisation."
Dr Ralf Hanschen, President of ŠKODA China, said, "Today, we have 22 million reasons to be proud. The production milestone is a special honour for our largest single market. Our flagship, the KODIAQ GT, is the fourth SUV model in the Chinese market and it rounds off the top end of our SUV offering in China."
ŠKODA AUTO is one of the longest-established vehicle manufacturers in the world. As early as 1905, the company started car production in Mladá Boleslav with the Voiturette A developed by the company founders Laurin and Klement. Since then, it has been produced 22 million ŠKODA vehicles at Czech and international plants.
In recent years, the Czech car manufacturer has further expanded its production capacity. To this end, the brand has invested more than 300 billion CZK in production processes and factories in the Czech Republic alone since 1991. In 2014, ŠKODA AUTO produced more than one million vehicles in a calendar year for the first time. In September 2017, the long-established Czech brand's 20 millionth vehicle rolled off the production line at the Kvasiny plant in the Czech Republic.
By as early as 1936, the Czech brand had five sales agencies in China. The Czech manufacturer entered the Chinese market again in 2007. Back then, ŠKODA began production of the OCTAVIA locally under the umbrella of SAIC Volkswagen. In close collaboration with the Chinese joint venture partner, ŠKODA had already developed China into its most important single market by 2010. After 75 months, the milestone of one million vehicles delivered was achieved; it took a mere 42 months to sell the second million. For the last three years, ŠKODA has been further developing its position and increasing its presence in the Chinese market. During the state visit of the Chinese president Xi Jinping to the Czech Republic in March 2016, Volkswagen, SAIC Motor Corporation Limited and ŠKODA AUTO signed a memorandum of understanding. This memorandum provides for a five-year investment plan worth €2 billion. The objective is to expand the current model range, for example by adding vehicles with alternative drive systems and several SUVs. ŠKODA delivered more than 300,000 cars a year in China for the first time in 2016. In the largest individual market worldwide, deliveries from the Czech manufacturer increased to 341,000 vehicles in 2018 (2017: 325,000 vehicles, +4.9%).
In years to come, ŠKODA will continue its growth strategy by launching more than 30 new models worldwide by the end of 2022, ten of which will be electrified.
Selected milestones in ŠKODA vehicle production history:
10 April 2019: 22 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
26 September 2017: 20 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
19 December 2016: 19 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
19 January 2016: 18 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
24 November 2015: 12 million ŠKODA vehicles produced at the Mladá Boleslav plant
10 December 2014: ŠKODA builds the 1 millionth vehicle in 2014 – the company produces one million vehicles in a calendar year for the first time
19 March 2014: 11 million ŠKODA vehicles produced at the Mladá Boleslav plant
26 August 2013: 4 million ŠKODA OCTAVIAs
9 July 2013: 1 million ŠKODA vehicles in China since 2007
5 February 2013: 15 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
12 October 2011: 10 million ŠKODA vehicles produced at the Mladá Boleslav plant
8 April 2009: 12 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
13 July 2006: 10 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
1991: 5 million ŠKODA vehicles since 1905
ŠKODA Storyboard
get škoda apps
Find out more about ŠKODA
EA189 Diesel Campaign
ŠKODA Worldwide
cookies sitemap


Ryan and his family visited Lake Walyungup only to discover that our passion for Blokart was highly contagious. After the Club's Race Day 4 event, all seven guests had the Lake to themselves to try their hand at land sailing in a Blokart.
After a briefing from our very own, Andrew Bates, the clan were ready to take on the 18 knot SSW winds. And true to form, the first time land sailors picked up how easy it is to sail Blokart. Not to mention taking home the Blokart Grin.
If you could see yourself in Blokart, Contact Us for more information.