text:
Everett School District Bond - Your Thoughts!
Please take our survey about why you voted how you did and what could be done in the next bond vote. The survey takes about 5 minutes. Results will be shared with the School Board. We encourage you to share this with your local friends - the more responses we have, the more accurate the survey is as a measure of public opinion.
The Superintendent SPEAKS (sort of)
This was sent to all district employees from Superintendent Gary Cohn a couple of days after the bond vote and when it really looked like it wasn't going to pass again. My commentary is in red.
Dear Colleague:
With only ten ballots remaining to be counted at the elections office, the published results yesterday afternoon were higher than the day before, but still less than 60 percent. As of the announcement yesterday, we had 58.58 percent approval for the bond – an impressive majority and enough to elect the officials who guide our nation and state, but not enough to build schools for students.
Thank goodness this still requires a 60% super majority. Bond votes obligate local taxpayers to 20 years of taxes and can have consequences on the local economy in the future. We want these long-term obligations to be thoughtfully passed with that knowledge. This isn't a tax that will go away in a few years - it's a long-term obligation and it should NOT be easy for a district to pass without solid numbers and reasons for asking the taxpayers to pay the district's debt for 20 years. The PTA and others are lobbying to get the law changed to a simple majority, but hopefully the taxpayers will fight that. You want to tie me to 20 years of your debt, it's not going to be easy....
This morning I am sharing with you the spirit of the response our Board of Directors President Pam LeSesne gave the media who called her when yesterday's election results were posted. I share her sentiments, as I also share our collective and dauntless resolve to continue this work on behalf of our students.
"In our classrooms, students learn about the value and power of our Democracy. The election result is not what the board or the district hoped for. However, it is our voter's answer, and we respect it.
The rest of the letter doesn't sound like it....
"Voters said no to our request for funding to build schools for more students. While the voters said no, the district cannot say no to the families moving here and to the hundreds and hundreds of students who will enter our classrooms in the next decade.
DRAMA ALERT!!!! This is not a decade-long failure. They get to ask again in February.
"Voters said no to technology that will help students build skills they will need for their futures. Without that technology infrastructure, our students will not be as competitive in their careers and higher education. "Our challenge now is, without these resources, how to respond to the real needs of children in Everett Public Schools.
I don't believe what they're saying and they shouldn't either. No one said "No" to kids. They said "no" to an administration and board who puts themselves first. It's shameful to keep using children as pawns this way. How about you ASK the voters why they said "no" instead of making sweeping assumptions that present a false idea that voters said "no" to punish the students? How many of those projects could your $28 million have said "yes" to?
"The board and district's next step is to consider what options we have for accommodating the hundreds of students who will be coming to our district over the next decade and in what ways we can ensure the best possible educational technology access for students.
DRAMA ALERT 2.0!!!! This is not a decade-long failure. They get to ask again in February.
"Until the board is able to convene and discuss tonight's results and set future direction, the district must put these capital projects on hold. "School districts can put bonds and levies on the ballot just twice a year – that is state law. If the board decides to ask voters again for some or all of this construction funding, the soonest that election could occur is February 2015."
There is no one to blame but themselves. They could have waited until August to put this on the ballot again - Ferndale, Lynden and others around the state are waiting. There was no hurry and, by doing what they did, THEY have delayed the projects, NOT the voters.
If they had put it on the August ballot after some thoughtful changes and listening to more than those who will vote for anything you attach a photo of a wide-eyed child to, they may have well passed it and could have accessed money by the Fall. Instead, they listened to those who voted "yes" the first time and just warmed it up and rammed it through again. Now, they can't ask again until early 2015 and so, rather than projects being delayed just a few months, they are potentially delayed up to a year. But, it was their decision to put it on the ballot again so fast, not anyone else's. They must own that fact.
As President LeSesne says, the board must convene to consider options, and that is a process that will take time and certainly more than a few discussions. We will begin preparing for the board some options for the timing and staging of educational technology. We will gather options for reconsidering how we focus operational funds and capital funds – and how and if we continue with any projects on the drawing board. This is going to take time, and I will keep in touch with you along the way as we consider some difficult decisions.
Voters across the state, in districts large and small turned down capital bond requests. As of Thursday evening, only two out of 12 April 22 school issues were passing. Lakewood School District to the north of us had gleaned 60.05 percent. Reardan-Edwall School District in Lincoln County earned an impressive 66.25 percent approval. (Actually, what I'm reading is that this bond FAILED. It straddles two counties and while Lincoln County voters heartily approved it with 66.25%, Spokane County voters rejected it in numbers that kept it from passing. It only got 54.93% approval)
The other district Thursday results were:
Pioneer,59.53%
Highland,58.90%
Everett,58.58%
Bridgeport,53.06%
Lake Washington,52.39%
Tenino,52.27%
WallaWalla,52.17%
Oakesdale,48.93%
Sequim, 43.61%
Dayton, 27.73%
All but Lake Washington and Everett are small districts in remote or rural areas that are still economically depressed or have small tax bases. None of these are "news" or even comparable. In fact, Pioneer District is on its SEVENTH try to pass their bond. Dayton is so tiny that it has ONE high school with 240 kids. The fact that these bonds didn't pass isn't unusual. It often takes several tries in small communities.
Thank you for your work on behalf of students, and please remember that 58.58 percent speaks loudly about the majority support your work and our students have from this community.
The law says you need more than a simple majority to pass a bond. Maybe it's time to reach past that "majority" and find out why the 42% voted against it. Given that Everett hasn't had a bond failure in 18 years and hasn't had a DOUBLE bond failure in 39, there might be a need assess the actual reason why rather than making assumptions or crowing about "majority support". That kind of talk doesn't exactly start winning over the 42% who will surely be voting again in February 2015.
Everett School District Bond Rejected Again
While the April 22 Everett School District Bond vote will not officially be certified by the county until May 6, and there MAY be a handful of votes counted and added to the total in their next update on May 2, it's basically a final tally here 3 days after the election. Yesterday's tally barely budged the needle in the district's favor and I don't think there are enough votes out there still to be reported that will push it to the needed 60%.
Here's how it looks for Round 2 of the Everett School District $259 million bond request:
Vote Count Percent
APPROVED 11,590 58.58%
REJECTED 8,194 41.42%
And, here are the certified results from the February vote:
Total Votes 18,328
You can read my take on Round 1 HERE.
So, they essentially got 1,456 more people to vote in Round 2 - a mere 8% increase. They got a 9% increase in those who approved the bond and 7% increase in those who rejected the bond. At the end of the day, they didn't even gain .5% in the final approval and certainly didn't get to their required 60% to pass it.
I assume, that like Round 1, they will sing the praises of the MORE than 50% who voted "YES". However, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. They don't get the money.
Now, let's apply a little history here - The Everett School District LOVES their history. They talk about it all the time and Larry O'Donnell - champion of everything the district does - even wrote a book on it in the early 1990's that I just happen to have a copy of.
The last time Everett faced an embarrassing (and really quite spectacular) bond failure was 1975. The district presented an $11 million bond in February of that year, and, not unlike February of this year, the levy passed and the bond failed. However, they waited an ENTIRE YEAR to try again, but alas, the bond failed AGAIN in February 1976. They put it on the ballot again that same year during the September primary election and it failed AGAIN. They finally set it aside for nearly 2 years and tried again with an increased amount of $16,972,000 in February 1978. They also had a smaller bond of $1.5 million for district swimming pools. The regular bond passed that year and the swimming pool bond failed.
But, notice that when the bond failed the first time, they didn't rush to put it on the ballot again with the attitude that they just needed to beat the bushes for more voters. They waited a year and suffered the humiliation of having it fail THREE TIMES in a row before they set it aside for nearly 18 months.
In other words, it's been nearly 40 years since we had this kind of failure in the district. There was another less spectacular bond failure in 1996. The district ran a bond in February that got less than 55% support. They did exactly what they did this year and ran it again immediately in April and got 60.3% approval. Perhaps they relied too heavily on history to repeat itself 18 years later.
Meanwhile, I have heard the School Board and Administration pat themselves on the back in the last couple of years for getting done what no other Superintendent and Board has been able to do for 20 years - they built a new administration building! Okay, GREAT! But then they also must own the fact that they achieved another historic milestone that stretches back farther than 20 years - they failed a bond TWICE in a row..... Are the new administration building and the bond failure connected? Absolutely!
So, what next? They cannot legally run another bond until February 2015. I assume that will run it again, then. However, will it be the same package with the backed-in and unsubstantiated project guesstimates and unrestrained money usage based solely on the discretion of the School Board? Who knows. It shouldn't be the same package and language if they truly got the message they were sent by the voters.
Of course, we here at the Everett School Board Project will be presenting our ideas in the coming weeks. We hope the school board and Superintendent has the courage to consider them. We would even welcome a meeting with Board President, Pam LeSesne to discuss them. Now is not the time to gather in all their properly pedigreed community friends to figure out what went wrong. In fact, I believe that parade of "Community Leaders" actually just annoys the living daylights out of average people - I heard it every time a letter appeared the paper from one of them.
Now is also not the time to fire up a public meeting that is carefully controlled and led by their expert manipulators. Now is the time to reach past the PTA cheerleaders and go directly to the moms and dads who, besides having kids in the schools, don't have any other connections or agendas beyond making sure their children are in safe and effective buildings getting a good education.
This will take a signal to the public that they are willing to accept public input outside their next Rotary meeting. This may take a Town Hall-style meeting where no one is telling us we must "accept positions we may not normally want to accept" or told what is and isn't acceptable to ask or discuss or that we are allowed to only make a 3-minute statement to which they will not respond in a board meeting. This may take them setting up tables at concerts, sporting events and Curriculum Nights and going where the parents are instead of asking the parents to come to their 4:30 Tuesday afternoon board meetings. They are going to have to listen FAR more than they talk.
We were told after the first bond failure that the only real failure was that we (the voters) didn't get enough information and that not enough of us bothered to vote. So, rather than listening (beyond asking for emails which they apparently only really wanted from supporters), they decided to just talk LOUDER and more OFTEN about the bond - as if that was all we needed as a public.
I could have told them that wasn't going to work. But, I don't have to now....
UPDATE: The Great Transportation Fix....
Check out what happened after we suggested a fix to a transportation issue that caused the district to look at messing with school hours.
LINK to the original post with update.
What it looks like to respect the taxpayers and put students first....
I'm sure the Bellingham School District has it's challenges and critics. I don't think there's a school district in the country that doesn't. However, in looking around at other local bond issues the other night to see what had been done and what was being done, I stumbled across a bond I could have gotten behind.
Last November (stay tuned, I'll comment on that in a moment, or one of our new school board directors will, rather), Bellingham ran a $160 million bond that passed with 66% approval. The bond includes an ambitious list of projects not unlike our own. They will rebuild two schools (I went to both) that are currently 48 and 52 years old. By the time the 48 year old high school opens on the same property the current one is, that school will be 52 years old. They apparently don't possess the arbitrary 40 year replacement cycle. They replace based on need.
They will update, modernize and repair roofs and HVAC systems in several other schools not unlike our own list of projects.
There is no technology on the bond because they ran it in a separated tech and operations levy in the past.
They asked for $2 million to upgrade the bus barn - something Everett did without asking the voters and something they use to justify the way they built the administration building.
They will build a small, new alternative high school that has been housed in portables for nearly 20 years.
They will upgrade the fields at all three Bellingham high schools
And, they will upgrade the facilities at their version of the Lively Property.
But, here's the kicker. They ASKED voters for $17 million to update and do safety upgrades to their 106 year old district office building (their version of the Longfellow building). They aren't asking for a new building - just for upgrades to it. Is $17 million a lot of money? Yes, it is. However, the statements made in this video warm my heart. In a nutshell, they say they acknowledge that no one really wants to pay for this BUT, they also flat out say that "we don't need to build a luxurious, large new building." Is that a shout out to Everett? Check out the video below.
Now for the timing of their bond. They ran it last November. Yes, NOVEMBER! That saved the district a LOT of money by running it alongside a regular election. But, by running it during a regular election, they were obligated to allow both a for AND against statement in the local voter's guide. The thought of that would cause our administration to curl into the fetal position in their new offices.
In fact, at the March 4 school board meeting where the timing of re-running the bond was discussed, new Board Member, Caroline Mason, had reservations about waiting until November because voters might get confused about what they're voting on. Please... we are just as smart a Bellingham voters. I think we could have figured it out. The translation of the statement is that in November, there would be too many voters who were there for other things and voted on the bond as an afterthought vs. voters in February and April who are there just for the bond.
Now, let's talk briefly about the language of the bond itself. It's BINDING! They don't give themselves a whole lot of closed-door wiggle room to do anything with extra money beyond doing MORE improvements to school facilities:
Section 2. Capital Improvements. The District shall make the following capital improvements (the "Improvements"):
(LIST OF ABOUT 11 IMPROVEMENTS THEY WILL MAKE)
The cost of all necessary planning, architectural, engineering, and other consulting services, inspection and testing, administrative and relocation expenses, on and off-site utilities, related improvements and other costs incurred in connection with the making of the foregoing capital improvements shall be deemed a part of the costs of the Improvements. Such improvements shall include all necessary furniture, equipment and appurtenances.
If available funds are sufficient from the proceeds of Bonds authorized for the above purposes, the District may use such funds to acquire sites for facilities of the District or to pay the principal of or interest on the Bonds, In the alternative, if available funds are sufficient from the proceeds of Bonds authorized for the above purposes and/or state and local circumstances require, the District may use such funds to acquire, construct, equip, modernize and make other capital improvements to the facilities of the District, all as the Board of Directors may determine, after holding a public hearing thereon pursuant to RCW 28A.530.020.
AND, HERE'S THEIR STATE MATCHING FUNDS DECLARATION:
It is anticipated that the District may receive funds from the State of Washington pursuant to Chapter 28A.525 RCW. To the extent that such state funds are not received timely and used to pay costs of the Improvements, the District intends to apply such state funds to construct and equip a new warehouse for District use (they put a name on what they may do with those funds instead of hiding them) and/or future school facility construction projects, including planning and design of such District facilities. Such state funds may also be applied to pay the principal of or interest on the bonds provided for herein or to make other capital improvements to the facilities of the District as the Board may determine after holding a public hearing thereon pursuant to RCW 28A.530.020.
That's cRaZy talk right there. Doesn't Bellingham know "The Everett Way"? They are supposed to be vague and deceptive about bond dollars so as to keep all their options open. I guess Dr. Cohn needs to make a trip up there to sit down with their Superintendent and "school" him on not making the other districts look bad.
I'm sure that while there were plenty who didn't want this bond to pass in Bellingham, I have a different perspective living in a district that goes out of it's way to keep the public out of their hair. Maybe if I lived in Bellingham, I might have been on the "no" side - I haven't researched if this raised taxes or not. But, after living here, I certainly have a much lower bar to compare bonds to in any city I might live. I just need to ask myself, "Is this better than Everett?" I bet that 9 times out of 10, the answer will be, "Yes".
A shout out to my home town for respecting voters and putting students first in word AND action.
North Middle School aka The Poster Child of Emotional Manipulation for Monetary Purposes
Not a real sign... but it could be.
In today's Everett Herald, there is a letter from a 7th grader at North Middle School. North seems to have become the "Poster Child" for the second running of the Bond. It's hard to sort out the truth in the condition of the school. We have had claims that buckets are placed in classrooms to catch ceiling drips and claims that students are getting SOAKED walking between classes on open covered outdoor hallways (it must have not rained much before they built the school in 1981....).
Now, we have a middle school student claiming that students are cautioned against leaning on the support posts of those covered walkways. REALLY? If that's the case, then the Fire Marshall needs to take a trip over there and assess the safety of the school. Perhaps he'll condemn it and then all the students will be evacuated to the Community Resource Center for classes....
However, just 2 years ago, the building condition report the school board received said this:
"At present, the Everett School District DOES NOT HAVE A CRITICAL HOUSING EMERGENCY in the form of classroom space across the District. None of the district's schools have been damaged from catastrophes or natural disasters such as fires, earthquakes, wind damage or related structural failures. All of the district's current permanent and temporary facilities are fully operable."
First of all, if what the 7th grader said IS true, people need to be fired over letting a school degrade into a dangerous situation. Seriously, fire everyone from the Superintendent on down who has anything to do with facilities maintenance and made the decision to merely warn students over fixing the problem. Especially since they were probably unstable clear back in 2012 when they broke ground on that new $28 million administration building. Where was the talk of the problems at North Middle School then? Where were the parents and the teachers and the students? $28 million probably could have more than adequately taken care of most of the issues, if not all, they are clutching their pearls over, now. It was apparently as acceptable to let students risk being crushed by a walkway cover as it was to let student break their ankles on the poor fields at the high schools. STUDENTS FIRST....
I hope that while the first thought of the district was, "Gosh, that ought to catch all those 'bleeding heart' voters who don't want to let the kids go wanting anymore and compel them to APPROVE the bond," that their second thought is now, "This makes us look REALLY bad...." Because, if it's true, it really does.
Meanwhile, who can forget THIS gem posted in the comments section of the Herald after an article about the bond:
"I work in the maintenance department of the school district so this must remain anonymous for my own protection, however I just can not vote for this. The complete waste and siphoning of money from my department must stop and our workers restored so we can have safe, healthy schools for these children. The custodians alone are still working under the 2009 budget cut and desperately need new equipment of their buildings and safety while our trades workers can barely keep up with demand or buy the proper materials with the constant squeeze from management.
This levy and bond money will only be grabbed from the taxpayers without their blessings and fed into the admins bloated budget while we plebeians suffer.
I will be voting no."
Which should lead any thinking person to wonder if our buildings and students aren't being used as pawns in a game of showmanship and public manipulation.
In 2009, the administration had an evaluation done of most of the buildings in the district. At the time, North Middle School received all 4's and 3's on the condition of the facility. A 4 is "Building makes positive contribution to educational environment" and a 3 is "Building suitable". If it had received 2's and 1's as Monroe and View Ridge did, it would have indicated a need for remodeling or upgrades.
At the time, the report said that upgrades and modernizations that WERE needed at North Middle School were estimated to cost about $2 million. Now, without any plans or detailed estimates, we have gone from $2 million to over $41 million for renovations and upgrades. How did that happen?
From the District's Building Condition Report
Add this to the fact that James Monroe Elementary and View Ridge Elementary were completely rebuilt for a cost of less than $19 million EACH. The modernization of North Middle School will be more than the cost of those two newly rebuilt schools COMBINED. Tear the thing down and start over - it HAS to be cheaper.
The point is that one has to wonder where the truth is in all this. Emotional blackmail and heartwarming platitudes are how school districts fleece taxpayers into writing them blank checks. I'm all for taking care of our schools so they operate efficiently and so that students in both ends of the district have schools of comparable quality. However, I am totally against purposely letting schools degrade to dangerous levels when they are on the downward slide of the district's arbitrary 40-year replacement cycle and then using those poor conditions to convince taxpayers to open their wallets "for the kids".
The high school I attended in Bellingham was built in the early 70's and, as of last month when I was up there, it looks exactly the same as it did the day I graduated 30 years ago. I'm sure there have been upgrades since then, but I'm also sure that students are STILL getting soaked walking from one side of the school to the other through the "California-style" open courtyard passing areas. But, there's probably little reason beyond that to tear it down and start over.
Meanwhile, I hope someone calls the Fire Marshall to go have a look at those support poles.....
We need to send a clear and unmistakable message to current leadership that things need to change. Everett taxpayers have repeatedly been called "Generous" by this superintendent and, frankly, I think it's becoming a code-word for "Sucker". Is it acceptable to make students wait just a little longer for their upgrades and fixes? I believe it is if it forces a long-term shift in attitude that benefits both the students and the taxpayers in the Everett School District. We need less secrecy and manipulation and more students as priorities. One has been too much "the norm" and the other has been sadly lacking in this district for far too long. You can say, "Students first" and "it's about kids" all you want, but at the end of the day, actions have spoken far louder than words.....
Businesses are People, too, I guess....
Everett is the "bluest" of towns. It's always been about the value of the "working man". Unions reign supreme and union members talk about being out to get "the man". Everyone celebrates the lowly worker and "average Joe" around here.
That is, until you cross the "Good Old Boys" network where some of the more prominent names in the community stand to lose something. Then, a parade of names with connections shows up in the Everett Herald with their community pedigrees attached in the form of self-important titles, business names, declarations of the number of years since their family rolled into town in a Model T or educational alphabets.
When there's money to be lost, it's not about the "average Joe" or the "worker" anymore, it's about influencing the "average Joe" to agree to pay money to the district so the school district can pay money to them. They do this by declaring that certain opinions are more valid and valuable than others in this community. Suddenly the "average Joe" doesn't matter - he's only a taxpayer to be tapped for their own interests.
The largest contributors to the Everett School District bond campaign this time are businesses who stand to win or lose depending on how this thing goes. Do they care about "the kids" or about the possibility of their own Gravy Train derailing? Some of them didn't make these kind of donations during the first campaign. Clearly, they are trying to protect their interests this time.
Dykeman Architects ($1500)
DLR group (architects & engineers, $1000)
Huttleball & Oremus Architecture ($1000)
AWA Electrical consultants ($500)
Bogard Engineers ($500)
Electro Communications Co. ($500)
Reid Shockey (Shockey Planning Group, $500)
Beresford Company (flooring, $500)
Micro Computer Systems, Inc (school computers, $500)
Rettenmeir Financial Services (educational bond services, $200)
Perkins Coie (the District's favorite Educational Law Firm, $250)
Some of them have already sent their obligatory letter to the editor with the correct pedigree attached to their signature. Many have personal connections to the Superintendent and members of the School Board outside their jobs.
In a town as "blue collar" as Everett, are we going to let these businesses pretend the are people, too?
If it's "about the kids", then let's get the business influence out of the process and listen to the "average Joe". But, so far, the district isn't ready to listen to Joe....
What it looks like to respect the taxpayers and pu...
North Middle School aka The Poster Child of Emotio...


According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 950 paralegals and legal assistants work in Montana.1 More people are taking advantage of courses offered in Montana paralegal schools as jobs in legal administration grow throughout the state. Employers in Montana, as well as in the rest of the US, are showing a preference for candidates who hold a paralegal degree, and schools in Montana offer a variety of options on campus and online.
Given these requirements, most paralegals in Montana begin their careers by earning a paralegal degree. It is also worth noting that a growing number of employers are more inclined to hire candidates who have a degree from a program approved by the American Bar Association (ABA).
University of Providence: The University of Providence (formerly University of Great Falls) offers a Bachelor of Science in Legal and Paralegal Studies as well as an Associate of Science in Paralegal Studies; both programs are approved by the American Bar Association. Students in both programs are required to complete and pass Introduction to Paralegalism, Introduction to Legal Analysis, and Legal Research and Writing. Paralegal majors also must pursue an internship with a designated law office or legal organization to gain experience in the paralegal profession. The Bachelor of Science takes 128 credit hours while the Associate of Science takes 64 credit hours to complete.
The University of Montana: The Department of Business Technology at the University of Montana has an American Bar Association-approved Associate of Applied Science in Paralegal Studies. This is a four-semester program that admits new students only in the fall and consists of 70 credit hours. Students enroll in Paralegal Studies courses and must also complete lower-level accounting, computer information systems, business, and psychology classes. Two dozen professors and instructors teach for the Department of Business Technology, contributing to the multidisciplinary curriculum of the paralegal studies program.
Garlington, Lohn & Robinson PLLP has been rated by US News as one of the best law firms in Missoula. Many of its attorneys have also been listed in The Best Lawyers in America. GLR specializes in many practice areas for businesses and individuals, including Real Estate Law, Intellectual Property, Estate Planning, and Products Liability. Browning, Kaleczyc, Berry, & Hoven PC has four offices across Montana from Bozeman to Great Falls, primarily servicing businesses and allied trade associations. Its core competencies are in legislative and public affairs, but the firm has grown to provide all types of legal services to its clients. BKBH invites recent paralegal graduates to contact the firm regarding career opportunities. Moulton Bellingham PC traces its Montana roots back to the turn of the century. It is one of the most respected law firms in Montana, with a diverse client base. The firm welcomes inquiries from paralegals interested in starting a career at Moulton Bellingham, with competitive salaries and excellent benefits.
Montana Association of Legal Assistants/ Paralegals (MALA) – Formed in 1992, MALA exists to foster communication between and promote the growth of Montana legal assistants and paralegals and the greater legal community.


text:
World Journal of Neuroscience
10.4236/wjns.2017.73025
Performance-Associated Factors of Elderly Patients with a Low Education Level, with Acquired Language Alterations in Tests to Explore Executive Functions
Erislandy Omar-Martinez1, Mariana Pino-Melgarejo2, Claudia Idárraga-Cabrera3, Yisel Rodríguez-Aldana1
1Universidad de Oriente, Santiago de Cuba, Cuba
2Universidad Autónoma del Caribe, Barranquilla, Colombia
3Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia
Received: Novenber 28, 2016; Accepted: July 17, 2017; Published: July 20, 2017
Introduction. Secondary alterations of executive functions occur in brain injuries together with the primary neuropsychological symptoms, irrespective of the location of the damage and the affected neural networks. Such secondary alterations of executive functions in the presence of language alterations, which is the most frequent primary neuropsychological alteration, in addition to exacerbating the linguistic processing deficit, may be associated to multiple factors inherent to the brain injury or the injured patient. Purpose. To describe the secondary neuropsychological alterations of executive functions in elderly patients with low education levels with acquired language disorders and determine general factors of the injury and of the injured patient (etiology, location, time of recovery from the injury, age, education level), associated to such secondary alterations of the Attentional Control System. Patients and Methods. The study was conducted on 68 elderly patients with a low education level with language acquired disorders, of both sexes, ranging between 60 and 80 years of age. The executive functions explored included cognitive flexibility, impulsivity control and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms, with the Trail Making Test, the Porteus Maze Test and series of loops. Statistical processing involved a Distribution of Frequencies and Multiple Ordinal Regression. Results and Conclusions. The statistical analysis found secondary neuropsychological alterations of the executive functioning in the elderly patients with language disorders of the study that are associated to the location and the time of recovery from the injury and are irrespective of age, education level and etiology of the injury.
Impulsivity Control, Cognitive Flexibility, Executive Functions, Irrelevant Automatisms Inhibition, Acquired Language Disorders
Multiple neuropsychological alterations of varying severity and depth occur in the presence of brain injury, which affect several processing subsystems of the cognitive system. Cognitive neuropsychology differentiates such alterations into primary and secondary alterations [1] .
Primary alterations result from a direct damage to the processing components and mechanisms of the subsystem that exhibit the symptoms. In secondary neuropsychological alterations, the impairment exhibited by a processing subsystem is an indirect result, whether from the impairment of the damaged subsystem or from compensation mechanisms set in motion by the cognitive system in an attempt to reorganize cognitive function after the brain injury [2] [3] [4] .
The secondary alterations that appear after a brain injury usually accompany the primary neuropsychological alterations and respond to the clinical and topographical nature of the primary injury [1] . However, apart from the topographical location of the primary damage and its clinical features, in every brain injury, together with the primary syndrome and concomitant with the abovementioned pattern of secondary alterations, a pattern of secondary alterations of executive functions is established [4] [5] . As it is, a fact that every brain injury results in secondary alterations that may involve the alert system, the orientation system toward environmental stimuli of the Attention System, and the components and mechanisms of executive functions [1] [6] [7] .
This appearance of secondary alterations of the attentional mechanisms and executive functions that occurs in the presence of every brain injury, takes place because the destruction of cognitive automatisms occurring in brain injuries increases the demand for processing and executive control resources for implementing conducts that used to be performed automatically. This implies increased consumption of attentional resources to regulate behavior [1] [2] [3] [4] [6] and a reduction of the Cognitive System resource fund. In addition to aggravating the primary symptoms, this produces alteration of executive functions, which are responsible for controlling the Cognitive System resource fund.
According to Moscovitch [8] , executive functions or, the attentional control system, as he calls them, assess the needs of the Cognitive System to establish the degree of priority of the information; summon the relevant information, assess the resources required by the working memory to maintain active the necessary representations and operations required during information processing, verify the degree of suitability of the cognitive goals to the demands of the environment, and control the allocation of resources: All of this is done by executive functions through their information selection and executive control mechanisms.
The selection of information implies the selection, maintenance and disconnection of relevant information and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms. Both operations demand cognitive flexibility that allows alternating between more than two tasks. While executive control implies controlling impulsivity and controlling execution of the Cognitive System's plans and goals [1] [3] [4] [7] .
Starting from these mechanisms of executive functions, cognitive neuropsychology suggests that their alterations are expressed as deficits, both to activate and disconnect information and maintain the cognitive flexibility required to alternate the attentional focus, as well as to inhibit automated routines that tend to prevail and respond in a planned, voluntary way to situations in the environment that demand immediate attention [1] [3] [4] [9] . The peculiarities of these alterations of executive functioning, when secondary, arise from the interaction between the primary syndrome and factors inherent to the brain lesion and the injured patient [1] [10] .
In the case of acquired language alterations, secondary alterations of executive functions exhibit singular clinical characteristics due to the manner in which cognitive function is compromised. Acquired language alterations are usually a consequence of cerebrovascular accidents or traumatic brain injury, pathologies that damage broad brain areas [1] [11] [12] [13] . This affects several neural networks and establishes an important physiopathological process that implies the loss of multiple cognitive automatisms which implementation requires mental resources and conscious control, affecting executive function [1] [4] [14] . Alterations of executive functions in acquired language alterations worsen linguistic deficits and produce other secondary impairments [4] .
The secondary alterations of executive functions exhibited by patients with acquired language alterations hinder the allocation of resources for linguistic processing and optimal distribution between verbal representations and operations active at each moment. This affects the selection of relevant verbal information and inhibition of the irrelevant, evaluation of the linguistic processing needs and allocation of the resources required to maintain the necessary linguistic representations and operations active in the verbal working memory [1] [3] [4] [5] .
However, despite the implications of secondary alterations of executive functioning for patients with acquired language alterations, research on the matter is scarce. In fact, few studies address the alterations of the different executive functions in the presence of brain injury and their possible relation with general factors of the lesion and its consequences to the patients' Cognitive System functioning.
In the literature, studies of executive functions refer to their specific character in psychiatric or neurological illnesses [15] [16] [17] . In publications like "Revista de Neurología", studies of executive functions are linked to many other disorders [18] . However, in an exhaustive search in editions of such magazine in the last ten years, no referral is made to studies on executive functions of elderly patients with low education level with acquired language alterations. Only a few authors refer to general matters on the topic [3] , without delving into the relation between the nature, severity and depth of the alteration of executive functions and the etiology of the lesion, time of recovery from the damage, extent and location, or patient age. All this, despite its relevance for designing and implementing diagnostic and rehabilitation strategies in each patient.
In this context, one could ask, what alterations of executive functions appear in elderly patients with a low education level with acquired language alterations? Is there a relation between general factors of the lesion and of the injured patient, and alterations of executive functions? What general factors of the lesion and of the injured patient are associated to alterations of executive functions in elderly patients with a low education level with acquired language alterations? This article attempts to answer these questions. It is written with the purpose of describing executive functions alterations (cognitive flexibility, impulsivity control and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms) exhibited by elderly patients with a low education level with acquired language alterations, and determining general factors of the brain lesion and of the injured patient (damage etiology, location of lesion, time of recovery from the damage, age and education level) associated with such executive functions alterations.
2.1. Population of the Study
A cross-sectional descriptive-correlational study was conducted from May through December 2015, in the Language Pathology consult of the "Centro de Estudios de Neurociencias y Procesamiento de Imágenes y Señales" of Universidad de Oriente. This study included in a consecutive way, the 68 elderly patients with acquired language alterations secondary to brain injury that fulfilled the following selection criteria: between 60 and 80 years old; intact motor function of upper limbs, visual-spatial coordination and sensory capacities; no history or clinical evidence of mental confusion, psychopathological disorders, mental deficit disorder or neurodegenerative symptoms; informed consent for taking part in the research.
2.2. Methodology
Each work session took place with the exclusive presence of the evaluator and the evaluated person, who was controlled for the possible presence of neuropharmaceuticals or other variables that could affect test performance.
Two hypotheses were assumed in the research: 1) "Elderly persons with acquired language alterations resulting from brain injury exhibit secondary alterations of cognitive flexibility, impulsivity control and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms, that reach different levels of severity and depth;" 2) "The secondary alterations of cognitive flexibility, impulsivity control and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms displayed by elderly persons with acquired language alterations resulting from brain injury are associated to the etiology of the lesion, the topographical location of the lesion, the time of recovery from the brain damage, age, and education level."
Verification of these hypotheses implied consideration of the variables: age (60 - 70 years, 71 - 80 years), education level (illiterate, taught to read and write, unconcluded primary, concluded primary, unconcluded secondary), etiology of the lesion (vascular, trauma, tumoral), topographical location of the lesion (anterior, posterior, anteroposterior), time of recovery from the damage (1 - 6 months, 7 - 12 months, 13 - 18 months), cognitive flexibility (adequate, deficit, disruption), impulsivity control (adequate, deficit, disruption) and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms (adequate, deficit, disruption).
The data to confirm the hypotheses were obtained with the following tests:
・ Trail Making Test B. Explores cognitive flexibility. It consists in the graphical execution of a verbal series that alternates two automated series. The subject must alternate between consecutive numbers and letters, enclosed in circles and randomly distributed over a sheet of paper. Grades are reported as the number of seconds required to execute the task. It is graded based on age and education level, and taken to a scale of 0 - 4 points. 0 (more than 93 seconds): pathological performance, 1 (from 69 to 93 seconds): Border Line performance and 2 - 4 points (less than 68 seconds): normal performance [1] [19] [20] [21] [22] .
・ Porteus Maze Test. Explores impulsivity control. Consists in the execution of 10 mazes, where the first 7 have 2 solution opportunities and the last 3 have 4. A line must be traced from a starting point to an exit without lifting the pencil. Test scoring takes into account how participants coped with the Test. Failure in executing a maze implies failure in coping. Adequate coping of all mazes: regular performance. Failure in coping in one or two non-consecutive mazes: Border Line performance. Failure of coping in two consecutive or more than two non-consecutive mazes: pathological performance [1] [4] [20] [23] .
・ Series of Loops. Assess inhibition of irrelevant automatisms. Consists in the execution of a series of loops. Grading is done based on calculation of the test's Execution Index (IE), for which is considered the total of loops executed (be) and errors in execution (ee). IE = 100 × (ee/be). The value of IE can range between 0 and 100. IE between 0 - 16: regular performance. IE between 17 - 25: Border Line performance. IE > 25: pathological performance [1] [4] .
2.3. Description of the Procedure
Once the population of the study was selected and the necessary data obtained, the tests to explore executive functions were administered. This was followed by data analysis and statistical processing with computer program SPSS. First, Frequency Distribution was implemented to verify the first hypothesis; this was followed by implementation of Multiple Ordinal Regression, with 0.05 significance and a 95% confidence interval to verify the second hypothesis.
64.7% of the 68 patients that comprised the study population for this research were male and 35.3% were female.
Average age was 72.3 years, with an age range from 60 to 80 years. Reported age for 41.2% of patients ranged between 60 and 69 years, while 58.8% reported ages between 70 and 80 years.
Education level for 20.6% of patients was unfinished secondary. 14.7% of the cases reported completed primary level, 38.2% reported uncompleted primary level, 14.7% reported having been taught to read and write and 11.8% reported being illiterate.
As to etiology of the brain lesion, in 61.8% of patients it was a vascular lesion (in 50.0% of subjects it was an ischemic vascular lesion and in 11.8% it was of the vascular hemorrhagic type). Trauma etiology was reported in 26.5% of total patients and 11.8% of the cases reported neoplastic etiology.
The topographic location of the brain lesion, in 52.9% of patients was located in the posterior cortex (occipito-parieto-temporal) of the left hemisphere. In 35.3% of patients, the lesion was located in the anterior cortex (frontal) of the left hemisphere. While in 11.8% of the cases, the lesion affected anterior and posterior cortical structures (frontal and temporoparietal essentially) of the left hemisphere. None of the cases reported right or bilateral location of the brain damage.
Time of recovery from the brain damage of total patient's ranges between 1 and 17 moths. The average time of recovery from the brain damage is 8.1 months, being higher in 50.0% of the study population; 35.3% of the patients recorded damage recovery periods between 1 and 6 months; 44.1%, recorded recovery periods between 7 and 12 months, and 20.6% recorded recovery periods between 13 and18 months.
Cognitive flexibility was adequate in 14.7% of patients (regular performance in the Trail Making Test). 50.0% of the cases recorded cognitive flexibility deficit (Border Line performance in the Trail Making Tests). While, the 35.3% of the cases, exhibited cognitive flexibility disruption (pathological performance in Task B of the Trail Making Test).
Impulsivity control was adequate in 32.4% of patients (regular coping in the Porteus Maze Test). 32.4% of the cases recorded impulsivity control deficit, (Border Line coping in the Porteus Maze Test). While, 35.3% of the cases exhibited impulsivity control disruption (pathological coping in the Porteus Maze Test).
Inhibition of irrelevant automatisms was adequate in 35.3% of the patients (Regular Execution Index in the Series of Loops). 26.5% of the cases recorded inhibition of irrelevant automatisms deficit (Border Line Execution Index in the Series of Loops). While 38.2% of the cases exhibited inhibition of irrelevant automatisms disruption (Pathological Execution Index in the Series of Loops).
As shown in Tables 1-3, the estimation of parameters in the Multiple Ordinal Regression implemented, with probabilities associated to the test > 0.05 (p > 0.05), with a 95% confidence interval, enable us to assume that the factors: age, education level, and etiology of the lesion, are not associated to alterations in cognitive flexibility, control of impulsivity and inhibition of irrelevant automat-
Table 1. Associated factors with cognitive flexibility.
Table 2. Associated factors with impulsiveness control.
Table 3. Associated factors with inhibition of irrelevant automatisms.
isms exhibited by patients with acquired language alterations. While the probabilities associated to the test < 0.05 (p < 0.05), with a 95% confidence interval, allow us to assume that: location of the lesion and time of recovery from the brain damage, are associated to alterations in cognitive flexibility, control of impulsivity and inhibition of irrelevant automatisms exhibited by patients with acquired language alterations studied.
As explained in the introduction of this article, suffering brain damage implies, in addition to generating a primary neuropsychological syndrome, the loss of numerous processing resources of the Cognitive Systems and destruction of a series of automatisms that are executed normally without consumption of cognitive resources. This results in that conducts that were automatically implemented, start demanding processing resources and attention control. All of this greatly reduces the limited resource fund of the Cognitive System [1] [3] [4] .
This condition implies that in the presence of any brain lesion that does not affect the structures supporting executive functions, it is common, together with the primary neuropsychological syndrome, that a pattern of secondary attention alterations appears in the executive functions [4] , which, according to Moscovitch neurocognitive proposal, are those responsible for distributing and controlling the processing resource funds of the Cognitive System [8] .
As suggested by Moscovitch [8] , executive functions are tasked (through their information and executive control functions) with the selection, maintenance and disconnection of irrelevant automatisms that attempt entering the system, the alternation of attention between different active goals, the control of impulsivity, and control of the Cognitive System's plans and goals execution [3] [4] .
Based on this functioning of executive functions (included within their information selection and executive control functions), cognitive neuropsychology assumes that the most significant alterations of this attentional component are expressed in the capacity to activate relevant information and its disconnection when it stops being relevant; in maintaining the cognitive flexibility required to alternate the attention focus between two or more stimuli; in the inhibition of strongly automated routines that tend to prevail; and in the capacity for controlled, planned, voluntary response to stimuli or surrounding situations, that demand attention and automatic and impulsive reaction [4] [6] [7] [9] .
The clinical characteristics exhibited by these forms of alteration of executive functions, when expressed as secondary to a primary neuropsychological syndrome, will arise from the dynamic interaction among the alterations of the primary syndrome themselves (which are in turn worsened by the secondary alterations of executive functions) and factors inherent to the brain lesion and the injured patient [1] [10] .
Hence, as shown in the analysis of results, the severity and depth of executive functions alterations secondary to acquired language alterations, reflect a significant inter-individual variability, associated, as shown by the statistical findings of this research, to the time of recovery from the brain lesion and the topographical location of the lesion.
These secondary alterations of executive functions, as noted by Omar-Martinez [1] , can be expressed as deficits (partial impairment of the functions) or as disconnections (loss of functions).
In the case of cognitive flexibility, performance of elderly adults with low education level with acquired language alterations in the Trail Making Test reveals frequent alterations, with varying severity and depth levels. This, assuming Omar-Martinez criteria [1] , is expressed as cognitive flexibility deficit or as cognitive flexibility disconnection.
Cognitive flexibility deficit appears as a difficulty to displace the attention focus on information that is no longer relevant, towards the new relevant information. In this case, the subject slowly alternates the attention focus between its active goals, which it reaches with much difficulty, or is barely able to complete just one of them [4] [10] . As to cognitive flexibility disconnection, it implies a loss of the function and is expressed as an inability to displace the attention focus from one task to another, or of information no longer relevant, to the new relevant information. This results in a complete constraint to perform more than one task simultaneously, observing a rigid, stereotyped and determined conduct [2] [4] .
Although in the studied patient population both forms of altered cognitive flexibility were recorded, there was marked presence of cognitive flexibility deficit. A large part of patients, even though they exhibited difficulty in executing the task and recording prolonged execution times, were able to complete the established goals. This indicates they were able to allocate sufficient processing resources to attain, although in a longer time, the goals established by the test. These difficulties are also linked to the unspecified slowness exhibited by patients with brain damage, which makes them demand more than subjects with an intact brain, to execute any type of task that implies cognitive effort [2] [4] .
Patients that recorded cognitive flexibility disconnection, in addition to exhibiting rigid, determined behaviors, were unable to adequately complete the test task. In these patients, together with impairment of cognitive flexibility, were recorded damage recovery times under 6 months and anterior or anteroposterior location of the brain lesion.
Patient execution of the Porteus Maze Test reveals frequent alterations in terms of impulsivity control, with varying severity and depth levels, which assuming Omar-Martinez Criteria [1] , are expressed as impulsivity control deficit or as impulsivity control disconnection.
Impulsivity control deficit implies that patients have difficult responding in a voluntary, control, planned way to stimuli or surrounding situations that require automatic and impulsive attention and reaction. These alterations are expressed whether due to failure during an assessment of the attention-demanding situation and determination of an adaptive response, or to difficulties in controlling automatic, impulsive attention during the time in which the situation is valued in order to voluntarily assume a certain determination [2] [4] .
In impulsivity control disconnection, before stimuli or surrounding situations that demand attention and automatic reaction, an impulsive, involuntary, unplanned conduct [4] prevails. This happens because the patient fails in assessing the situation in terms of the planned, voluntary determination of a response and cannot control the trend of responding automatically to the attention demands of the stimulus at hand, without assessing the situation, or the real demands that it implies [1] [4] .
Although both types of impulsivity control alteration were recorded for the patient population with acquired language alterations, the number of patients exhibiting impulsivity control deficit is much higher than the number of patients exhibiting impulsivity control disconnection.
The severity and depth of the impulsivity control alterations exhibited by the patients with acquired language alterations, as shown by the statistical findings, are associated to the time of recovery from the brain lesion and its topographical location.
Taking this into account, it was expected that a parietal location of the lesion implied an aggravation of the alterations for maze execution. The task of the test, in addition to recruiting structures in the prefrontal area of the brain, based on impulsivity control and strategic planning, demands visual-spatial functions that essentially recruit parietal structures [23] . However, no elements are recorded that indicate a worsening of the alterations in patients with parietal damage. Nevertheless, the time of recovery from the damage is also associated to the recorded alterations of executive functions, and definitely influences in patient's executions [24] .
In the inhibition of irrelevant automatisms, execution exhibited by the patients in the Series of Loops, reveals frequent alterations with varying severity and depth levels, which assuming Omar-Martinez Criteria [1] , are expressed as irrelevant automatisms inhibition deficit or as irrelevant automatisms inhibition disconnection.
The fundamental characteristic of irrelevant automatisms inhibition deficit is that the subject, in the presence of situations similar to those in which it acquired strongly automated routines (which tend to prevail), exhibits difficulty inhibiting them, barely attaining or with much difficulty, implementation of the relevant conduct [1] [4] . The subject is capable of inhibiting automatisms, but with much difficulty.
While in irrelevant automatisms inhibition disconnection, the subjects are unable to inhibit automated routines that tend to prevail during performance of a task [1] [4] . Hence, the routine prevails in performance of the task and precludes implementation of the relevant conduct.
Both ways of irrelevant automatisms inhibition alterations are present in the patient population. However, as with cognitive flexibility and impulsivity control, patients that exhibit irrelevant automatisms inhibition deficit prevail.
These patients exhibited difficulty in inhibiting the automated routine during task execution, but although it demanded much effort, they were able to adequately implement the relevant conduct. This type of situation, as has already been mentioned, is common in the neuropsychological patient where the brain damage causes global slowness of the cognitive function [2] [4] .
In the cases where inhibition of irrelevant automatisms disconnection was registered, the exhibited performance was distinctly pathological, as none of the patients was able to attain the relevant conduct.
In all the cases, as shown in the analysis of results, the best executions were reported in patients with posterior location of the brain lesion. Those cases with anterior location of the lesion that exhibited scarce alterations in the inhibition of irrelevant automatisms, exhibit prolonged times of recovery from the brain damage. It is therefore assumed that this factor lessened the involvements implied for functioning of the executive functions, damage in the anterior region of the brain, due to the limitations this type of lesion imposes on the Cognitive System's resource fund [4] .
Nevertheless, it is important to value that the reported frontal damages, in addition to having been registered around the Drill area and showing different levels of topographical extension, in none of the cases directly affected frontal structures that, as assumed by authors like Moscovitch and Umiltà [8] , Duncan [25] and García-Molina, Tirapu-Ustárroz, Luna-Lario, Ibáñez, and Duque [26] , are at the basis of the functioning of executive functions.
The proven fact, based on the statistical findings obtained by means of the Multiple Ordinal Regression implemented in the research, of the connection between the topographical location of the lesion and the time of recovery from the brain lesion, with secondary alterations of the patient's executive functions during performance of the administered neuropsychological tests, is entirely consistent with what has been presented thus far, as well as the fact that age, education level and etiology of the lesion are not associated to the exhibited patient executive functions alterations.
From a neuropathology perspective, a lesion's topographical location, in general, is a neurological factor that by its own essence is associated to a large part of the characteristics shown by the neuropsychological alterations exhibited by patients with brain damage. On this factor depends the neural networks affected by the lesion, which directly or indirectly determine the primary neuropsychological alterations, as well as the areas to be affected due to the effect of diaschisis, which give rise overall, to the secondary neuropsychological alterations [27] [28] .
The functional organization of the brain implies that specific brain areas are going to be recruited in a more or less defined way for the implementation of specific psychological functions. The cortical regions of both brain hemispheres, which are essentially responsible for cognitive function, are divided structurally and functionally, by the Central sulcus. From this, afferent processing of information takes place in the posterior regions of the cortex and efferent processing and mental control of activity (including executive functions) takes place in the anterior regions. This causes that secondary alteration that will be manifest in the functioning of executive functions in presence of a focal lesion, will be mediated by the anterior or posterior location of the lesion (in addition to being associated to the alterations inherent to the primary syndrome.) General physiopathology of the damage and the amount of processing resources and cognitive automatisms lost will depend on the location [2] .
In frontal lesions, secondary affectation of executive functions function must be, therefore, more distinct and exhibit greater severity and depth than in parieto-temporo-occipital lesions. This because cognitive functions supported by frontal brain circuits make the greatest demand for processing resources from the Cognitive System [2] [4] .
The time of recovery from the brain damage, defined as the period elapsed since the patient sustained the lesion until the time he is subject to the neuropsychological assessment [1] , is a very important factor associated, as shown by the statistical data obtained, to the secondary alterations of the executive functions registered in patients with acquired language alterations, based on their performance in the neuropsychological tests administered. This factor has a significant influence in the severity and depth of attentional alterations, mainly when they are a consequence of a general reduction in resources of the Cognitive System.
Hence, recovery from the physiopathological conditions caused by brain injury and the brain's capacity to modify functions and compensate damages has proven to play an important role in the recovery of cognitive functions and processing resources after brain damage [29] . This indicates that the time of recovery from the damage is linked to neuroplastic changes subsequent to lesion acquisition. Because the greater of time elapsed after the lesion is sustained, the less severe and deep are the executive functions deficits.
The brain plasticity at the core of matters linked to the time of recovery from brain damage expresses the nervous system's adaptive capacity to minimize the effects of lesions through a structural and functional reorganization of the brain [30] . Important changes occur in brain physiology after a brain injury, which recovers from the global effects of the lesion, and secondary symptoms associated to the primary symptoms start alleviating. This progressive recovery of functions will depend of factors such as the brain region compromised, etiology of the lesion and the age at which patient sustained the damage (the brain's capacity to adapt to a lesion and to compensate the lesion's effects is greater in an immature brain than in an adult brain) [31] [32] [33] .
This factor is significantly associated to how the patient will perform in the different neuropsychological tests it will be subject to, as well as its adaptation to its disability and compensation of its deficits. These peculiarities that have been argued are reflected in the results obtained in this research, where the most compromised executions of the different functioning of executive functions are encountered in patients with the shortest recovery time from the brain injury.
Omar-Martinez, E., Pino-Melgarejo, M., Idárraga-Cabrera, C. and Rodríguez-Aldana, Y. (2017) Performance-Associated Factors of Elderly Patients with a Low Education Level, with Acquired Language Alterations in Tests to Explore Ex- ecutive Functions. World Journal of Neuroscience, 7, 293-306. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjns.2017.73025
1. Omar-Martinez, E. (2012) Factores asociados a alteraciones secundarias del Sistema de Control Atencional en pacientes afásicos. Revista Neurología Argentina, 4, 59-66.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuarg.2011.12.001
2. Benedet, M.J. (2003) Metodología de la investigación básica en neuropsicología cognitiva. Revista de Neurología, 36, 45-66.
3. Benedet, M.J. (2006) Acercamiento neurolingüístico a las alteraciones del lenguaje. Neurolingüística. Aplicaciones a la clínica. EOS, Madrid.
4. Benedet, M.J. (2012) Fundamento teórico y metodológico de la neuropsicología cognitiva. IMSERSO, Madrid.
5. Omar-Martinez, E. (2011) Factores que determinan el rendimiento de pacientes afásicos en pruebas para la exploración de funciones del Sistema de Control Atencional. Universidad de la Habana, La Habana.
6. Luck, E.J., Woodman, G.F. and Vogel, E.K. (2000) Event-Related Potential Studies of Attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 432-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01545-X
7. Yantis, S. and Serencesy, J.T. (2003) Cortical Mechanisms of Space-Based and Object-Based Attentional Control. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 187-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00033-3
8. Moscovitch, M. and Umilta, C. (1991) Modularity and Neuropsychology: Modules and Central Processes in Attention and Memory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 1-59.
9. Kenemans, J.L., Bekker, E.M., Lijffijt, M., Overtoom, C.E., Jonkman, L.M. and Verbaten, M.N. (2005) Attention Deficit and Impulsivity: Selecting, Shifting, and Stopping. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 58, 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.03.009
10. García-Ogueta, M.I. (2001) Mecanismos atencionales y síndromes neuropsicológicos. Revista de Neurología, 32, 463-467.
11. Ardila, A. (2014) Aphasia Handbook. Florida International University, Miami.
12. Bembibre, R., Soto, A., Díaz, D. and Hernández, A. (2001) Epidemiología de la Enfermedad Cerebrovascular Hemorrágica en la Región Central de Cuba. Revista de Neurología, 33, 601-604.
13. Berthier, M.L. (2005) Poststroke Aphasia: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology and Treatment. Drug and Aging, 22, 163-182.https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200522020-00006
14. Perrone, M., Fodaro, K., Perini, C. and Pietrapiana, P. (2005) Aspectos Clínicos del Paciente con dano Cerebral Después de un ano de Tratamiento. Revista Espanola de Neuropsicología, 7, 3-15.
15. Fuentes, L.J. (2001) Déficit de Atención Selectiva en la Esquizofrenia. Revista de Neurología, 32, 387-391.
16. Martos-Pérez, J. (2008) Procesos de Atención en el Autismo. Revista de Neurología, 46, 69-70.
17. Vázquez-Marrufo, M., González-Rosa, J., Vaquero-Casares, E., Duque, P., Borges, M. and Izquierdo, G. (2009) Déficit Atencional en Pacientes con Esclerosis Múltiple. Revista de Neurología, 48, 453-458.
18. Rodríguez-Jiménez, R., Cubillo, A., Jiménez-Arriero, M.A., Ponce, G., Aragüés-Figuero, M. and Palomo, T. (2006) Disfunciones Ejecutivas en Adultos con Trastorno por Déficit de Atención e Hiperactividad. Revista de Neurología, 43, 678-684.
19. Giovagnoli, A.R., Del-Pesce, M., Mascheroni, S., Simoncelli, M. and Laiacona, M. (1996) Trail Making Test: Normative Values from 287 Normal Adult Controls. Italian Journal of Neurological Science, 17, 305-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01997792
20. Lezak, M. (1995) Neuropsychological Assessment. Oxford University Press, New York.
21. Ruffollo, L.F., Guilmette, T.J. and Willis, G. (2010) Comparison of Time and Error Rates on the Trail Making Test among Patients with Head Injuries, Experimental Malingerers, Patients with Suspect Effort on Testing and Normal Controls. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 14, 223-230. https://doi.org/10.1076/1385-4046(200005)14:2;1-Z;FT223
22. Stuss, D.T., Bisschop, S.M., Alexander, M.P., Levine, B., Katz, D. and Izukawa, D. (2011) The Trail Making Test: A Study in Focal Lesion Patients. Psychological Assessment, 13, 230-239.https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.13.2.230
23. Marino, J.C., Fernandez, A.L. and Alderete, A.M. (2011) Valores Normativos y Validez Conceptual del Test de Laberintos de Porteus, en una Muestra de Adultos Argentinos. Revista Neurológica Argentina, 26, 102-107.
24. Iglesias-Sarmiento, V. (2008) Lesiones Cerebrales y Procesos Cognitivos. Universidad de Vigo, Vigo.
25. Duncan, J. (1995) Attention, Intelligence, and the Frontal Lobes. In: Gazzaniga, M.S., Ed., The New Cognitive Neurosciences, MIT Press, Cambridge, 721-733.
26. García-Molina, A., Tirapu-Ustárroz, J., Luna-Lario, P., Ibáaez, J. and Duque, P. (2010) Son lo Mismo Inteligencia y Funciones Ejecutivas? Revista de Neurología, 50, 738-746.
27. Anderson, S.W., Damasio, H. and Tranel, D. (1990) Neuropsychological Impairments with Lesions Caused by Tumor or Stroke. Archives of Neurology, 47, 397-405.https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1990.00530040039017
28. Narbona, J. and Crespo-Eguílaz, N. (2005) Trastornos de Memoria y de Atención en Disfunciones Cerebrales del Nino. Revista de Neurología, 40, 33-50.
29. Ríos-Lago, M., Munoz-Céspedes, J.M. and Paúl-Lapedriza, N. (2007) Alteraciones de la Atención tras Dano Cerebral Traumático: Evaluación y Rehabilitación. Revista de Neurología, 44, 291-297.
30. Bergado, J.A. and Almaguer, W. (2000) Mecanismos Celulares de la Neuroplasticidad. Revista de Neurología, 31, 1070-1095.
31. Aguilar, F. (2013) Mecanismos Biológicos de la Plasticidad Neuronal. Plasticidad y Restauración Neurológica, 2, 143-152.
32. Elbert, T. and Rockstroh, B. (2006) Reorganization of Human Brain Cortex: The Range of Changes Following Use and Injury. Neuroscientist, 14, 129-141.
33. Sans, A., Colomé, R., López-Sala, A. and Boix, C. (2009) Aspectos Neuropsico-lógicos del Dano Cerebral Difuso Adquirido en la Edad Pediátrica. Revista de Neurología, 48, 23-26.
● WJNS Subscription
●Most popular papers in WJNS
●About WJNS News

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Who dosen't want to invest into NEW things?! That's where the money is.. right?! Well.. it's not always a good thing to invest into NEW things and I will tell you why!
At first.. let's think about why we invest after all.. For me personally.. investing is about making money first. It's not the only important factor, but it's the most important in my opinion.
The one BIG problem with investing into NEW things is it's VALUE. There's usually very little of it. Let's take new companies for example. When you invest into a company then you first should calculate it's present value and.. second you should look what this company is doing in 2, 5 10 years plan. Is this company growing and getting more valuable.. or is this the expired niche this company is in.
Goal is to BUY yourself into the company when it's cheap(price of the stock is cheap/1% of the company is cheap) and if the company is grown and become more valuable then your share is now worth more! It sounds really simple and not so hard to understand… BUT many people still make this mistake and on both sides as investors and as business owners.
MISTAKE that many people make!
The main mistake many business owners make is that they ask too much money for their business. We have seen it many times in Shark Tank. I do understand what the business owners mean.. they believe that their business will be THE NEXT BIG THING. BUT.. even if it will be the next big thing.. why would the investor pay you for your future price.. is it for that if your company becomes successful.. he will just get his money back?!!
In my experience this same situation is happening not only in stock market, but also in startups & cryptocurrency.
The positive side with companies is that you will actually get your share in that business and businesses produce income. So in long term there is still a chance for you to become profitable, even if you bought into the company with HIGHER PRICE it was valued at!
I know a lot of people who bought into BitCoin when it was TOO obvious (too many investors in) and now they have lost some of their money. Like with everything.. BitCoin also has it's reasons why it came down and we are not going to discuss them in this post. But BitCoin coming down is the best thing ever happened to average investors! People started to trust cryptomarket too much! In the future the losses would have been much bigger.
I am not a professional investor or a licensed teacher in this investing world. I am just a guy who is always learning, making money with investing and has a common sense.
When you are looking at the new potential investment opportunity, then see if you can calculate it's present price. If you can't then you have to be more careful. If it's just a startup with very little results.. you can always customize your agreement with extras. This is possible if you are investing into startups.
When it comes to crypto… in my opinion we haven't seen anything yet. Bigger companies with HUGHE IT TEAMS are not in the game yet… and believe me… there is a reason for that. In my opinion when they do enter the market.. I would be very unhappy holding hundreds and thousands in todays cryptos. But let's see… nobody knows what the future will bring.
I wish you the best investments for your money!
Leave your thoughts down below into comments.


text:
The 77th annual Golden Globe Award Nominees honor the best in film and American television of 2019. The awards are scheduled to take place on January 5th, 2020, in Beverly Hills, California. Ricky Gervais will be hosting the ceremony, for the fifth time.
2019 Best Motion Picture — Animated
Photo Credit: Golden Globes
Photo Credit: DreamWorks
How To Train Your Dragon Story: How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is a computer-animated action-fantasy film loosely based on a book series. It is the final installment of the How To Train Your Dragon trilogy, and follows a hero named Hiccup. Hiccup must find the dragon's world with toothless, his dragon companion while he encounters new friends and foes.
Fun Fact: With a running time of 104 minutes, this is DreamWorks Animation's longest film.
Prediction: I really enjoyed this film and liked the way they ended the trilogy. It has become the fifth highest-grossing animated film of 2019 and has received praise from many critics. The animation was breathtaking and the story was brought full circle. I don't expect this film to win the category for this year but I do expect the film to get a nomination for an Academy Award.
Photo Credit: Disney
The Lion King Story: I don't think this movie needs any introductions. The Lion King is a 2019 animated musical, and remake of the 1994 animated film. This highly realistic film follows Simba, a young lion cub, and his epic journey to find himself. If you've seen the original film or have read Hamlet than you already know what to expect from this film.
Fun Fact: There are a total of 86 different species to be found in the movie.
Prediction: The good thing about this film is that no animals were harmed in the making of this film. As a fan of the original Lion King, I prefer the 1994 animated film version by far. Don't get me wrong, the animators or designers of this film did a fantastic job! The animals are realistic and I believe they should be recognized for their work. I just have an issue with remakes of films that have already been nominated for previous awards in the past. I know there has also been much debate about this film as an animated film and should it even be nominated for this category? I think of this film as more CGI and should be nominated for special effects, not for best animation.
Photo Credit: Laika
Missing Link Story: The team from Laika has created a film that explores Mr. Link, Man's primitive ancestor, and the charismatic Sir Lionel Frost and their quest to find myths, monsters, and a family.
Fun Fact: The bar sequence has more shots than any sequence ever produced in stop motion.
Prediction: Being a fan of Laika, I don't necessarily think this was their best film. Unfortunately, this movie bombed at the box office and even though it has received praise from critics, it still falls short. I did find it interesting that this is the first Laika film to feature an all-adult cast, but I don't know too many adults or children who have seen this film. The stop motion sequences are phenomenal and Laika always does a great job with their animation, but I do not see this film winning the category for this year.
Toy Story 4 Story: Woody, Buzz Lightyear and the rest of the original characters from the Toy Story franchise travel on a road trip with Bonnie. They meet a new toy named Forky, who decides he does not want to be a toy. Prepare yourself for an existential rollercoaster.
Fun Fact: This film marked John Lasseter's final involvement with Pixar Animation Studios before he exited the Disney company as a chief creative officer.
Prediction: The animation for this film was really captivating. Especially the scene where Bo Peep and Woody say their goodbyes in the rain. I personally don't think there had to be another Toy Story film but Pixar did a good job adding new characters that you care about. I thought the story was a tad bit confusing, and a little unnecessary. I didn't like the message of the film but i do see this film being a strong contender for the category. If Frozen 2 does not win this category I expect Toy Story 4 to take home the award.
Frozen 2 Story: Hey, look another sequel! Frozen 2 takes place three years after the original film. Elsa, Anna, Kristoff, and Olaf embark on a quest that soon turns in a journey of self-discovery. Ice Powers may be included.
Fun Fact: Walt Disney Animation Studio's 61st film, and last film of the 2010s.
Prediction: And the winner is… Samantha? Frozen 2 is probably one of my favorite animated films in this category. I absolutely loved the emotion, songs, and storytelling of this film. Being a fan of Frozen, I really enjoyed how in this sequel they tell the background of each character their faults and strengths. The animation was amazing and even though some of the songs were highly unnecessary it didn't take away from the film itself. I expect this film to win this category and look forward in seeing more Disney movies that aren't afraid to add darker themes.
AwardsChildrenDisneyEntertainmentFilmsFrozen 2Golden GlobesHow to train your dragonLaikaLion KingMoviesPredictionreviewLeave a comment
2019 Best Animated Video Games
92nd Academy Awards – Best Animated Short Film Shortlist Nominees


text:
McCullough's Mailbag: Where will Carlos Correa sign? Will the Detroit Tigers contend in 2022?
By Andy McCullough Nov 8, 2021 79
Greetings and welcome to the first full week of the offseason. The playoffs are over. The collective bargaining agreement is expiring. Wade Miley is a Cub. It is all happening.
With the GM meetings set to begin later this week in southern California, let's take some questions, culled from submissions via subscribers to The Athletic and Twitter.
Where will Carlos Correa end up? — David B.
I received several versions of this question. David B. asked in the most concise manner. Congratulations to David B.
Before we begin, let me provide a caveat to this question, and all those which follow. Given the uncertainty of the labor situation, it is hard to say how this winter will unfold. The threat of a lockout could put all transactions on hold before a lockout even occurs. It is possible that owners and executives spot opportunities in the month of November, before the CBA expires, and gamble on the landscape not altering much in the subsequent agreement. Most likely, though, everything will freeze until the teams know what the rules look like for 2022. How many teams make the playoffs? Is there a universal designated hitter? What does the competitive balance tax look like? I doubt many clubs rush into moves before they know these things.
Anyway. Carlos Correa. Good player. Someone should sign him.
The place to start is Correa's most recent employer. The Astros have held the line thus far in their reported offers. The team appears willing to commit to Correa for half a decade, when the contract he will likely sign will last twice that long. The most recent bid to surface was $160 million for five years, as reported by Fox 26 in Houston.


text:
Interesting Research on Resources – Things You Probably Never Knew
Escape Room Games.
People are increasingly becoming interested by escape rooms. The escape rooms are simply games where physically the players will use a set of clues and hints to help solve a puzzle and attain the objectives of the game. In most escape rooms the player will usually have some limited amount of time to solve what has been hidden in the rooms. These games can be held in different areas and settings to make them more interesting. If you visited different parts of the globe, you will discover that the game has been embraced more than one would imagine. In fact you will find areas with permanent escape rooms set . For the thrilling experience that the game brings a long, some people follow the game wherever it goes. The game will have teams of around six to a dozen players . The game requires the players to manipulate the surroundings so that they can achieve the set objectives.
The game could be made to take different themes in the setting that the game is being held in, this makes the game really interesting The games will have varying levels of difficulty making them really interesting as well because the players want to play a game that will test their abilities. The games require the player to utilize all the senses that they have. You don't need to have prior knowledge in particular before you step in this game. Children can also play the game ,you just need to tone the game down to the level that children can understand. In his game people will be locked in a room and they have to come together to help unravel clues that will lead them in freeing themselves finally. click this website to learn more about the game now.
This games will call for a lot of interaction between the players so as to help in solving the puzzles. The success of the game will require the all team players to contribute something that will help the team in achieving the set objectives. Most of the games will have a limit time of one hour. For the experienced teams they might employ different strategies and that will help in solving the puzzles. There are areas that people make mistakes in when solving the clues but is it doesn't matter how many mistakes you make so long as you get the clues right and escape the room in time. You need to be deep into the game when playing it, being in the game means merging with the theme so that you can unravel what is hidden with ease. The game helps in strengthening bonds of those that are playing especially when they make achievements together.
Cite: discover this
CategoriesTravel
Previous PostPrevious Smart Tips For Uncovering Entertainment
Next PostNext What I Can Teach You About Options


Are you an older adult needing transportation? Are you helping someone with a disability find suitable housing? Do you care for someone with dementia? Do you need activities that your loved one can attend? Community Living Connections can connect you with assistance that meets your current or future needs.
Community Living Connections is a network of advocates for adults facing aging or disability issues. Community Living Connections provides anyone who calls a caring, highly-trained specialist who will give them easy access to information, individual consultation and service options. Calls to the Community Living Connections line are free and confidential.
Who is able to receive help?
While our services are geared toward those needing help with aging or disability issues, Community Living Connections staff will help anyone who calls.
Community Living Connections provides the most comprehensive, reliable network for aging and disability services in the Seattle and King County area. Our highly-trained staff and network of providers are supported by a broad base of funders giving us the ability to offer people a variety of options for programs and services.
Call Community Living Connections at 206-962-8467 or (toll-free) 1-844-348-5464, or visit www.communitylivingconnections.org.