Discussion in 'Touring Northern Thailand - Trip Reports Forum' started by Jurgen, Mar 18, 2015.
Excerpt: The infamous "Golden Triangle", a neighborhood filled with armed bandits and drug dealers; this is for sure a baloney in the 21th century, at least for the Sop Ruak apex. Arriving from Chiang Khong I fulfilled my Mekong Promenade's last loop in this touristic, but globally compelling, region.
My actual "Mekong Promenade", a three weeks and 4'700 kilometers journey, was completed in October 2012. I divided my write-up about it in eight chapters, who took a long time to be indited. This is the last part, and before drafting it, I had several additional opportunities to visit the "Golden Triangle" again. When relevant, I have updated information and added missing pieces.
My first encounter with the "Great River", and my first stopover in Sop Ruak, was in March 1989, when I cruised up in a small boat, from Chiang Saen, on a package tour. Impressions collected during my visit, like the high limestone rim, on the Lao side, and the view toward the sand bank through wooden and concrete arches, at a not yet crowded view point, always remained in my mind. Illustrations from this period, a quarter of century back in time, also helped to keep up my memories.
In order to complete my Mekong ramble, I had to drive a last stretch north, to Sop Ruak, an apex nicknamed the 'Golden Triangle'. Leaving Chiang Khong on Route 1129, I stopped at the city's outskirts to visit 'the Chinese Nationalist cemetery'. It is an interesting singularity, a decaying monument to a page of history linked to a specific immigration group: the Kuomintang 93rd Division soldiers. For Mekong travelers, it is a compelling awareness as these people were instrumental in shaping the "Golden Triangle"; they battled against the communist insurgency and also played a major role in the region's opium and heroin traffic. Currently, this graveyard is mostly closed to visitors, with its doors opening, from time to time, particularly on April 4th, the Chinese "Tomb Sweeping Day".
A hundred meters further up, a new "Wonder of the Buddhist World" is under construction. A large head, installed at the road's level, is beckoning passerby to "Phu Savan" temple's construction site. It will crown a huge Buddha image, under construction on the compound's hill. The "trick", to upheave the heavy block to its final position, on the statue's torso, is in the aggregation of seven, two meter high slices, to be moved separately. The construction's progress is slow, as another ten million baths have to be funded before its completion, probably in 2017. It is, however, already worth to stop at the temple who affords a nice view over the city and displays various images from the Buddhist pantheon, including a baby Siddhartha in its characteristic Lumbini finger raising position.
After this second stop, I rushed to my day's destination, crossing up the hill, through Kiu Khan, and keeping the trail near to the Mekong (Route 4007) open for my return journey.For several years this itinerary was under construction and renovation; it is now totally in "racing track" conditions.
(the former Burma), Laos and Thailand meet in a cuneate way.
The region's denomination origin, however, is not clear and could date back to ancient times, when caravans transported all sort of valuable goods through this area. It covers a vast territory, from the Burmese hinterland, to North Laos and to Thai mountain ridges rolling down to the Mekong. During the Indochinese wars, and till the mid-nineties, it earned the infamous reputation for being the world's largest opium supplier [1 and 2].
The shape of the sand bank at the three countries' border limit, varies from season to season and from year to year.
As the opium captivation faded out, probably because most traffic had shifted to Afganistan and, maybe, through a promotional effort to downplay it, another tourist trap was setup: a mini Disneyland, featuring the Buddhist pantheon and well-stocked with souvenirs. It provides an alternative to the Lao slot machines, installed in the other rim's casinos. Here, however, the gains are not paid out cash, but accumulated as merits for the next life.
On the Mekong's rim, the mythological Naga snake is ubiquitous, decorating temple roofs and stairs, guarding spiritual places and invited to most popular festivities.
Khun Sa has his own museum in Thoed Thai, where, despite his passing, in October 2007, his memories are still alive in the population.
The "Hall of Opium Golden Triangle Park and Musuem" is a large, well documented and instructive showcase of the history, traffic and ravages of opium and heroin. Unfortunately, but this is understandable in such a well setup, multimedia assisted, display, it is not allowed to take pictures inside the building.
Khun Sa has passed away and the former Kuomintang soldiers are busy harvesting tea in Doi Mae Salong, but the "Golden Triangle" is still not liberated from all narcotraffic plague. The eradication went well on the Thai side, but under cover traffic of amphetamines, notably in the Burmese jungle, is still flourishing, and even opium production is dangerously on the rise .
A Mekong pirate act, leading to the massacre of eight Chinese sailors, in October 2011, was a crime too much. China, eager to defend its citizens and commercial interests along the Mekong, handled with determination. Naw Kham, the attack's mastermind, was tracked, captured and publicly executed in Kunming, with three accomplices, in March 2013. This was a strong warning to the remaining bandits, many from the desbanded Khun Sa army, still operating from Burma.
My two first landings in Sop Ruak, about twenty five years ago, were from a small boat. Cruises were organized from Chiang Saen, up the Mekong river, but, I could not recall their exact itinerary. My most lively souvenirs were huge limestone walls, with small carved stairs and people bathing, washing cloth or collecting water. As I had recorded these scenes on slides, it was easy to remember them, and I was eager to find their location.
All along the way, from Chaing Saen to Sop Ruak, I had observed the Lao rim, without spotting the high sand walls; I reckoned that they might be located further upriver. To confirm this, I boarded a small pirogue in Sop Ruak and asked the boatman to cruise north. It was one year after a deadly pirate act, and going upriver still seemed too risky to him; after a short sailing, he tacked back, letting me admire the Kings Roman Casinos and the Golden Buddha from the water level perspective.
At first, I thought that the steep sand-wall might have been at the casino's place, where the river's rim is now domesticated with stone walls.
Later on, as I visited the "Golden Triangle" again, I took old pictures with me and showed them to locals. They recognized the place wich is situated further downriver, just before Chiang Saen, in Ton Phueng village. Nowadays, this segment of the Lao rim is also more tamed, without yet being totally walled.
For another river perspective, I once boarded the free shuttle boat linking Sop Ruak to the "Kings Roman" world. After passing Thai immigration and checking out of the country, I took a craft bound for the smaller casino, just on the other rim. On both sides, official crossing check point are now set up and, to enter Laos, a visa (30-42 dollars) is required. A couple of nationalities, however, including Swiss like me, Russians, Luxembourg, Japanese, Koreans and ASEAN nationals are exempted from this paiement. For the return to Thailand, I had a multiple entry autorisation, but I am not sure what the regulation would be for others travelers.
People not inclined to gambling, might find nothing interesting on the Lao side. After a short walk along the river's rim and the observation of ladies trying their luck with a catch in the brownish waters, I returned to the peer. Everything, in the free and enjoyable cruise back is advertised in Chinese language, with a matching music from the Celestial Empire.
I had satisfied my curiosity by crossing to an area which, in 1967, was the battleground of a major opium war between Khun Sa's troops and Kuomintang soldiers. No landmark, probably, reminds about this gloomy "Golden Triangle" narcotic saga's infamous episode.
Down from Sop Ruak, the important historic city of Chiang Saen is often overseen and forgotten. Few remnants give evidences of the mystical Yonok's splendors; a kingdom contemporary with Angkor and, finally occupied by the Khmer. This region, where, later on, king Mengrai was born, is the cradle of the whole Lanna civilization.
For an significant overview, it is worth to visit Chiang Saen's National Museum which provides archaeological artifacts, whose highlight is the famous "Kirimukha", a Kala face stucco from an old Lanna temple. The museum is also rich in ethnographic information about the dwellers of the northern region.
Wat Chedi Luang, a sister of Chiangmai's famous temple is located next door, on the same coumpound. The 14th-15th century building was largely in ruin with only a tall chedi, covered with vegetation, pointing out of brick crumbles. During my latest visits, however, part of the surroundings were closed to the public for thourough restauration.
Other interesting remains of king Phya Saen's city, are temples, protection walls and moat vestiges. One of my favorite visit is to Wat Chom Kiti, an historic temple hosting a Buddha relic enshrined in a stupa. Its hillside location affords a georgeous view over the Mekong river.
Nowadays, Chiang Saen has an intensive commercial maritime activity. On maps, its harbor is located on the Lancang, the «Turbulent River", as it is called in Chinese; the main cruising link is, of course, with Yunnan. Finally, Francis Garnier's and the Mekong Exploration Commission's dream of a trading waterway to China is a reality. Enlarged through rock blasting, the river channels see more and more large ships replacing modest rice barges. The French colonial administration, however, did probably not anticipate the heavy down-flow of cheap goods and vegetables inundating Indochinese and Thai markets; for the best interest of the Middle Empire.
Increased fluvial transport, including noxious goods like fuel, is also an environmental hazard. From afar, I witnessed the black mushroom cloud of a burning tanker; it was a gloomy sight.
In addition to unfinished constructions and already deteriorating parts, the temple was plagued by the heavy 2014 earthquake. Many images lost their arms loaded by metallic alms bowls, standing like Milo island statues.
The Golden Triangle's strategic position has made it a crossroad for caravans of merchandises and people migrations. Lawa were long time settler in the area, the Tai Yuan (Northern Thai) have chosen to build up kingdoms there, Burmese have occupied the place and wars have pushed hilltribes, Chinese and Khmuic people over borders. Many of these ethnic groups still have their own settlements and maintain their traditions.
The Lue people (Tai Lue) have migrated along different Routes, sometimes attracted by opportunities, sometimes displaced. Originally from Yunnan (they call it Sipsong Panna) they still had their own Principality, in Muang Sing, before colonial France attached them to Laos. Haad Bai, a village of this ethnic group, is located along Route 4007, following the Mekong rim. This community keeps weaving skills alive, and many houses still feature wooden looms. A small center, producing and selling fabrics can also be visited.
Tai Lue are Buddhist and celebrate the events linked to their faith. For instance, at the end of the lent period (Ok Phansa), in October/November, a colorful traditional festival assembles the village on the temple compound.
After Haad Bai, I followed a narrow country dirt road to Don Tee. The last strech of this trail features a frail bamboo bridge that I did not entrust to support the combined wait of my mount an me; looping back to Route 4007 was a safer choice.
After unsuccessful attempts by French explorers, and later on, by the colonial administration, to dominate the « Great River », she was left alone, nearly forgotten from the outside world, for decades. In the twenty first century, with the riparian countries' economic development, covetousness arose again. China has already began or completed five dams, tributaries are walled in Laos and Thailand and projects are on paper or under construction, in the middle and lower river stretches, for a (provisory) total of nineteen hydro-power barrages. Transforming the « Mother Water Khong » in a gigantic escalator, to quench the energy thirst of developing economies, raises human and ecological concerns. Some organisation, like the « Peace Walk for the Mekong River » draw awareness through publications and demonstrations; probably an unequal fight  .
Back on Route 1129, for the last span of my itinerary, I spotted a mountain rice field (dry rice). Ethnic Tai people are not found of cultivating this staple and I expected to see hilltribe dwellers in the neighborhood. In a small temporary shack, I met a Khmu family, people from an ethnic group that I often meet in Laos. I had never seen them in Thailand, but they have two villages along this Route, in Huai Yen and Huai Kok. As they told me, they had migrated from Luang Namtha.
The "Rocky River" has not always been amicable to the Lao royal family. She helped August Pavie to save king Oun Kham's from Haw bandits, but took revenge on King Sisavang Vong by drowning fourteen of his children in a naufrage. Another mishap hit the last Lan Xiang king, Chao Anouvong, who lost his daughter in stony waters, just opposite the Khmu ricefield. A shrine to this princess can be visited along Route 3B (North), a paved link between Huai Xai and the Special Economic Zone hosting the Kings Roman Casinos.
To complete my "promenade" along the Mekong, I could add this left rim Route 3B to the paved itinerary. For the time being, however, I only drove to the "Princess Shrine" and to a next village, Bahn Nam Keung.
"Naka's Kiosken", a coffee balcony with a georgious view, provides a delightful stopover, just before driving back to Chiang Khong.
Dirt bikers might enjoy a newly cut trail, starting just after Huai Meng (another Lue village). They might close the loop along the Mekong rim, passing through cultivation and ending, covered with dust, at the old ferry pier.
The paved itinerary follows the main Route, up and downhill, with, at the day's end a backdrop colored in warm hues with gorgeous sunsets.
At the end of this last loop, my odometer already showed a distance of 4400 kilometers.
To achieve my "Mekong Promenade", I had to drive another 300 kilometers, back to Chiangmai. The total journey added 4700 kilometers to my bike and three enjoyable weeks to my life.
cruises. Other opportunities to explore my favorite river – and to write about it – were just at the doorstep.
The Southeast Asia Opium Survey Survey by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) shows a "relentlessly upward" year-on-year increase in poppy cultivation from the low point in 2006.
Sensational pics & reporting Jurgen.
I have to keep re reading it to take it all in & then plan to go back to the Mekong again. You keep turning up gems of info & history.
Certainly a Wealth of Information supplied there. Incredible! And Fantastic Photos. Great Report Jurgen Well Done!
Great stuff Jurgen and particularly interesting to me as it's my home area. Must look for that Chinese graveyard near Chiang Khong, now I know roughly where it is.


In new BETA version is first step of chromecast implementation. Only by device without Engine using. Of course device can not support half of channels but it is good experiment.
You can enable Chromecast in Menu->Playback or in Options ->Playback.
I am interesting in any feedback.


text:
Mahabodhi Temple – Temple Of Meditation And Enlightenment
Posted by gayavisit | Dec 24, 2021 | Education, General | 0 |
Lord Buddha, also known as Siddhartha Gautam, was an incarnation of compassion, and lakhs of people flocked to the Mahabodhi Temple Complex in Bodh Gaya 2500 years after his birth. Lord Buddha's allure is so strong that you can feel it even at the location of his Enlightenment.
Mahabodhi temple (UNESCO World Heritage List, 2002), Bodh Gaya, Bihar, India, 3rd century BC.
The Mahabodhi Temple complex is a lovely spot where monks congregate to chant and meditate at the feet of a massive Buddha statue. Tourists congregate to pay homage to the magnificent soul that walked among us in flesh and blood to enlighten humanity. Many people visit Bodh Gaya, especially around Buddha Poornima, which falls at the end of April or May every year.
History Of Mahabodhi Temple
Architecture Of Mahabodhi Temple
Decline Of Mahabodhi Temple
Restoration Of Mahabodhi Temple
Some Interesting Facts About Mahabodhi Temple Complex
The Story Of Buddha Statue
The Descendent Of The Original Bodhi Tree Is Inside The Temple
Protection And Management Requirements
There are four significant temples associates with the Buddha's life at various stages. One of the most important is the Mahabodhi Temple. Some of the people said that it was here that the Buddha sat and meditated under a fig tree before obtaining Enlightenment and becoming the Buddha.
This spot is essentially where Buddhist doctrines and beliefs were born. Buddhists believe that this location is also the universe's hub. It is the only location capable of bearing such spiritual weight: it will be the last site to be destroyed at the end of time and the first to be reborn in the new world.
Mahabodhi Temple, Bodhgaya, India
Buddha claimed to have attained Enlightenment in the 6th century BCE. Therefore the location was essentially naked for several centuries until Ashoka arrived. Between 260 and 250 BCE, the emperor visited the location and the pilgrimage town of Bodh Gaya and chose to build a temple and monastery in honor of the Buddha.
The Diamond Throne, an elevated platform, claimed to mark the particular site where the Buddha sat when he attained Enlightenment. He built it the first thing. The site also has several stupas (Buddhist mound-shaped temples).
BODHGAYA, INDIA – JULY 25: (NEWSWEEK AND US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT OUT) A Thai Buddhist monk walks out the entrance where the Bodhi Tree lies at the Mahabodhi Temple on July 25, 2005 in Bodhgaya, India. It was underneath the Bodhi tree where Buddha attained enlightenment in 528 B.C. following years of meditation. It was from this spot that he set out on his life of preaching. Other Buddhist and Hindu pilgrims visit the temple to pray and meditate below the tree.
Bodhgaya is the most important Buddhist pilgrammage destination in the world and one of the most engaging of holy sites associated with Buddha's life. Buddha was born Siddartha Gautama in 563 B.C. near the present day border of India and Nepal. Buddha denounced all of his earthly possessions and on his path to Enlightenment, spent 6 years meditating on life's excesses in a cave near Bodhgaya.
Following his disappointment with asceticism, he took a 'middle path' of less extreme practices and formulated his philosophy of a balanced approach to life. After spending close to a week in meditation underneath the Bodhi tree, he came to realize his true nature and that of reality. A sapling of the Bodhi Tree was taken to Sri Lanka from which a cutting came back to Bodhgaya which stands now next to a Buddhist temple built by Emperor Ashoka in the 3rd century B.C. The current temple was restored in the 11th century and again in 1882. There is a constant flow of pilgrims from all religions. (Photo by Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images)
What you see today at the Mahabodhi Temple, on the other hand, is from a different age. In the 5th and 6th centuries CE, Indian emperors of the Gupta Empire restored the site. It is when the colossal temples that now define Mahabodhi were constructed. They constructed it in the Gupta style of Indian architecture (not a Buddhist style). They knew for their excellent brickwork.
The temples are ornately decorated and ornamented in the Gupta style, with many sculptures of Buddhist figures, reliefs and carvings of Buddhist (and some Hindu) scenes, and other Buddhist symbols. Lotus blooms, a sign of purity and detachment, adorn the location in abundance.
The Mahabodhi Temple fell into decay after the 12th century CE. In India, Islamic interests posed a danger to Buddhism. And they abandoned temple site. It was later renovated in the nineteenth century and brought back to its previous glory. This Temple is still one of Buddhism's most sacred locations. It is also a tribute to India's architectural and cultural legacy today.
Mahabodhi Temple, Bodh Gaya, India, engraving from Storia delle Indie Orientali (History of the East Indies), part one, by Giovanni Flechia and Francesco Costantino Marmocchi, 1862, Turin. (Photo by Icas94 / De Agostini via Getty Images)
Following the White Hun and early Islamic conquests, such as Muhammad bin Qasim's, Buddhism fell as the dynasties that patronized it crumbled. The Pala Empire saw a remarkable rebirth (where the temple stands). Between the ninth and twelfth centuries, Mahayana Buddhism flourished under the Palas.
Following the fall of Palas by the Hindu Sena dynasty, Buddhism's standing in India began to decline once more until it became practically extinct. Muslim forces raided Bodh Gaya and the surrounding areas in the twelfth century C.E. The Mahabodhi Temple was mostly abandoned and fell into disrepair.
Hindus founded a monastery at Bodh Gaya in the fifteenth century. The monastery's abbot, or mahant, became the area's major landholder over the ages, claiming possession of the Mahabodhi Temple grounds.
Under the guidance of Sir Alexander Cunningham, the British administration of India began to renovate Mahabodhi Temple in the 1880s. Shortly after, in 1891, the Sri Lankan Buddhist leader Anagarika Dharmapala began a campaign to reclaim ownership of the temple from the mahant, despite the mahant's objections.
After a somewhat successful campaign in 1949, Hindu Mahant transferred control of the temple to the Bihar state government, which established a temple management committee.
The committee includes nine members, most of whom must be Hindus by law, including the chairperson. Under the management committee, Anagarika Munindra, a Bengali man who had been an active member of the Maha Bodhi Society, became Mahabodhi's first head monk.
It is thought that Gautam Buddha acquired Enlightenment in this location. After three days and three nights of meditation under a peepal tree, young prince Siddhartha (who eventually became Gautam Buddha) received all of the answers he sought.
The Mahabodhi Temple complex, established by Emperor Ashoka in 260 BC. It is one of the first Buddhist temples to be constructed completely of brick. Its architecture has been extensively praised as one of eastern India's oldest brick constructions.
In June 2002, the temple complex was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site. All of its religious treasures have been legally safeguarded since then.
The Mahabodhi temple's central tower is approximately 55 meters tall. It repaired numerous times throughout the nineteenth century. It is encircled by four lesser towers.
Aside from the magnificent statue, the temple complex includes the Bodhi Tree (a descendent of the tree beneath which Buddha attained Enlightenment), the lotus pond, and other historic stupas that interest Buddha enthusiasts. These locations links to the seven weeks that Buddha is claimed to have spent in this location.
India, Bihar, Bodh Gaya, Great Buddha Statue
The temple's initial statue was supposed to be a one-breasted Buddha statue. Legend has it that a traveler pledged to make the best statue in the world if it met three criteria. He requested that the shrine be filled with fragrant clay and a candle and asked that the door be shut for six months.
He also asked that no one bother him for the next six months. People, however, became impatient and shattered the door just four days before the six-month mark. They discovered an unfinished statue that was flawless in every way (one breast). There was no sign of the traveler. Later, a monk sees Lord Maitreya erecting the statue on his own.
Are you aware that the temple houses the Bodhi tree, where Buddha attained enlightenment? It's only half-true. After completing the temple, Emperor Ashoka sent his heirs to Sri Lanka and other parts of India to promote Buddhism. He also gave a sapling of the original tree to Sri Lanka.
When Muslim invaders damaged the temple and the original tree, a sapling from the Sri Lankan tree carried back to Mahabodhi and planted. The tree's strength, on the other hand, is eroding.
The tree is slowly slanting and gaining support from the temple walls. It could cause major damage to the temple. Therefore when the tree falls, people prepare to replace it with a clone. Make sure to pay a visit while the tree is still standing.
The Bihar State Government owns the Mahabodhi Temple Complex. Through the Bodhgaya Temple Maintenance Committee (BTMC) and Advisory Board, the State Government is responsible for the management and protection of the property under the Bodh Gaya Temple Act of 1949.
The Committee meets every three or four months to examine the status of the property's maintenance and conservation projects and control the flow of pilgrims and tourists. The Committee has 85 full-time employees and over 45 part-time employees. They assist the Temple with office personnel, security guards, gardeners, and sweepers.
The norms and regulations of the Site Management Plan created by the Government of Bihar govern all development activities inside this World Heritage property and in Bodhgaya. Under the technical guidance of the Archaeological Survey of India, all conservation and restoration work on the Temple Complex.
The property's primary source of funding comes through Devotee donations. They can effectively maintains the temple complex. And they can adequately handle the flow of visitors thanks to the management system's continued operation.
Many pilgrims/tourists (national/international) visit this pilgrimage site Mahabodhi Temple. There is necessity the development of infrastructure and public amenities. The Bodhgaya Temple Management Committee also aspires to take a long-term strategy to property management. For example using solar energy and maintaining a pollution-free environment.
Also Read: GAYA TO PATNA TRAIN | IMPORTANT TRAINS
PreviousWhich Is The Best Month To Visit Gaya? | Best Travel Time?
NextGaya To Patna Train | Important Trains

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Established 1971. AKC Irish and Gordon Setters bred for superb family and personal hunting companions. Outstanding temperaments. All health clearances. Champion/OFA'd stud service. Some top competition prospects for conformation and field trials. Our setters are medium sized with gorgeous heads, athletic bodies, high intelligence. All have excellent noses and great style running and on point. Many are natural retrievers and good water dogs. We also offer a unique program of client support. We are located on 4.5 fully fenced acres and our clients may bring their dogs for socialization and exercise by appointment. We maintain a comprehensive website for information and suggestions in many areas. We are available 24/7 to our puppy buyers for emergency assistance of any kind re their dogs. We have an extensive referral network of experienced professionals both locally and throughout North America. We are a county-licensed facility but do no public boarding. We do, however, take our clients' dogs for emergencies and vacation boarding at greatly reduced rates. We have a grooming facility on site. We assist our clients with specific breeding plans from evaluation of their dog as breeding-worthy, through obtaining health clearances, to choice of mate, help with breeding and whelping, and raising, grading and placing puppies. We are currently working on our seventh and eighth generations.


text:
Marika Toidze
Director of Medical-Diagnostic Center
Marika Toidze graduated from the therapeutic faculty of the Tbilisi State Medical Institute, after which she upgraded her professional skill in the department of internal medicine and cardiology at the University hospital of Milan. She began her professional career in the therapeutic department of Tbilisi Hospital N4, and then she left for the USA, where she passed the United States Medical Licensing Examination and worked in New York, in various departments of the Presbyterian Hospital of Columbia at the Weill Cornell Medical College. On the same basis, she took part in scientific research of Alzheimer's disease under the guidance of Professor M. Lynn and Professor B. Flint. In 2005, Marika Toidze returned to Georgia and continued her career as the medical director of the "Dostakari" Union and Sachkhere Regional Hospital- Polyclinic Unification. Since 2009, she is a professor at Davit Tvildiani Higher Medical School in the field of internal medicine and rheumatology. Since 2013, Marika Toidze was the head of the primary health care department of the Aldagi insurance company. In the same year, she joined the Evex team as the director of the department of internal medicine and outpatient diagnostic service management. From 2018 up to now, she is the deputy General director of the Caucasus Medical Center. She also holds the position of the director of the therapeutic and diagnostic center of the network.
Marika Toidze was the medical director of the PHTLS program in the Trans Caucasus region, accredited on the basis Georgian College of Emergency Physicians. She is still the medical director of the FCCS in Georgia, an accredited course of the Association of American Anesthetists. Marika Toidze is the author of several scientific works in the field of medicine and healthcare. And also, she has author's accredited programs in the field of continuing medical education for doctors. In addition, Marika Toidze headed the editorial board of the first Georgian licensed translation of the textbook of internal medicine ("Manual on Internal Medicine") of the main Massachusetts hospital, published by "Bulletin of Georgia".
Marika Toidze is a member of the corps of state experts. She has licenses in the field of internal medicine and rheumatology and continues to work in both clinical and academic directions. She participates in the US Continuing Medical Education Program and international professional conferences. She is also an organizer of international conferences on the development of primary health care in Georgia.


Tests have proven that engine blocks twist under load with each piston fire. This twisting causes bore distortion, cylinder wall friction and can cause block failure. The Valley Girdle Pro is an affordable solution that adds strength to the top end of the engine block and dampens harmonics by stabilizing the engine block to prevent block twist. Made in the U.S.A.


Located in the central business dis- trict, the architectural style of the hotel is unique. The aluminum grille makes a dialogue with the lighting.
The tone of gray exposed concrete is gentle, blending minimalist geomet- ric lines and the neat and cool tune in the significant deep charm.
It has charisma both inside and out- side. Apart from sightseeing in Taic- hung, don't forget to take this hotel tour as an art journey!


text:
CALL FOR ENTRIES: onedotzero moving image festival
新闻|Digital Arts| 2008-06-02 12:47:31
Digital creativity initiative onedotzero has extended its deadline for submissions for its 2008/09 global touring festival. Moving image and digital art creatives now have until July 18 to submit works.
The organization arranges screenings, festivals and events at venues across the world. The current competition is seeking new moving image possibilities and encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration across all aspects of moving image and other complementary artforms.
Entries must fall into one of onedotzero's specified categories. This year a new category is based on the theme of citystates, aiming to engage audiences, industry and media with an in-depth exploration of city life, insights and culture.
"More people than ever before are living in cities bringing with it a greater socio-cultural mix, sense of movement and transition than previously experienced. Now more than ever it is important to understand and interact with the broad spectrum of what the city offers us-how we inhabit it, how we engage with its' cultural make up, and how we view and influence its future," comments Shane Walter, onedotzero's creative director.
Submission themes are the following:
Core programmes: central to the onedotzero ethos; explorations of new creative expression, visionary moving image and progressive visual ideas. categories that are open to submissions include:
-Wow + Flutter: home for exploring motion graphics, motion typography, visual code, processing, animation, enhanced digital and short experimental works
-Wavelength: dedicated to exploring innovative, visually progressive music videos and rarely screened promos and unofficial versions.
-Extended Play: a select international programme of critically acclaimed, digitally inflected short films and animations, which extend way beyond the boundaries of traditional storytelling and style
-J-Star: the latest survey of music videos, motion graphics and shorts from some of Japan's finest moving image-makers and young talent.
New categories: onedotzero is developing new categories based around the overarching theme of citystates: onedotzero seeks inspired views of contemporary city culture based on the following:
-Innovative moving image work that explores the collisions, myths, rela tionships, sensory overloads, and multiple layerings of contemporary city life, within individual, the communal and global contexts
-Evocative interpretations of all types of terrain, environments, architecture
-Urban street art and graffiti
-Thought-provoking work that targets social, environmental, and political concerns and issues.
Other: onedotzero is also interested in receiving proposals for installations, interactive works and live performance in addition to single screen works and explorations of typography for current and future plans for current and future project plans.
For further details and submission procedures click here.
相关字体家族
相关字体公司
© 2009-2021 字客网 版权所有


Coles solicitors have the services of two eminent family law Solicitors who have many years of experience to their respective names. Shauna Finch in our York office and Alison Skene in our Northallerton office will be happy to advise you on the full range our family law services. Both are members of Resolution, your first choice for family law, and offer a free initial meeting.


A leading sales and marketing company with over 500 employees was looking to re-launch their employee incentive program. The company sought to reengage the general employee base by demonstrating the continued investment in the workforce and encouraging greater participation by managers. The company also needed to recognize staff for their contribution to the company's success in timely, tangible and impactful ways. The workforce ranged from 22 year old interns to senior staff members that are over the age of 60, with a near even split between female and male employees (at 49% and 51% respectively).
To ensure all employees were given the same opportunities to be recognized and rewarded for their contributions, regardless of where they fell within the demographic spectrum, Rymax designed the program to recognize employees on an individual, departmental and company-wide basis. Rymax introduced a new look and feel that reflected the company's brand new identity for the employee incentive program and created monthly communication touch points throughout the year. The employee incentive program is a points-based recognition and reward platform based on corporate, departmental, training, and individual goals, along with rewarding peer-to-peer accomplishments, years of service and spot recognition for employees who go above and beyond their daily responsibilities.
Corporate goals are established and approved by a hierarchy of human resources and senior managers to help encourage companywide commitment and management buy-in. Departmental and training goals are set by human resources and departmental managers with feedback from the individual team members. All objectives are updated quarterly and have corresponding point values assigned to each achievement.
When points are awarded, the employee receives a personalized e-certificate from the program administrator via email and/or is recognized publically with a formal plaque in person at companywide events. Employees can then choose to redeem their points right away or bank them into their online account to redeem for a reward of their choosing, from over 300 brands and 10,000 brand name products.
There was a marked increase of 92% in the logins on the employee incentive site year-over- year and a high employee retention. An employee survey that was distributed at the end of the campaign revealed an astounding 100% of the workforce felt that the employee incentive program is a valued employee perk. Of those employees that made suggestions about revising or adding any departmental goals, 100% felt their managers were receptive to their suggestions and discussed their departmental goals with their manager. 91% considered them achievable, a marked improvement from the previous year. More than 80% of employees were extremely satisfied with the recognition received and stated being recognized in a timely manner for their achievements.


text:
Nonpartisan Education Group
outside both boxes
Category: research ethics
Censorship, Common Core, Education policy, Ethics, information suppression, K-12, research ethics, Richard P. Phelps, Testing/Assessment
Surprise! SBAC and CRESST stonewall public records request for their financial records
Say what you will about Achieve, PARCC, Fordham, CCSSO, and NGA— some of the organizations responsible for promoting the Common Core Initiative on us all. But, their financial records are publicly available.
Not so for some other organizations responsible for the same Common Core promotion. The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the Center for Research on Educational Standards and Student Testing (CRESST) have absorbed many millions of taxpayer and foundation dollars over the years. But, their financial records have been hidden inside the vast, nebulous cocoon of the University of California – Los Angeles (UCLA). UCLA's financial records, of course, are publicly available, but amounts there are aggregated at a level that subsumes thousands of separate, individual entities.
UCLA is a tax-supported state institution, however, and California has an open records law on the books. After some digging, I located the UCLA office responsible for records requests and wrote to them. Following is a summary of our correspondence to date:
I hope that you can help me. I have spent a considerable amount of time clicking around in search of financial reports for the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), both "housed" at UCLA (or, until just recently in SBAC's case). Even after many hours of web searching, I still have no clue as to where these data might be found.
Both organizations are largely publicly funded through federal grants. I would like to obtain revenue and expenditure detail on the order of what a citizen would expect to see in a nonprofit organization's Form 990. I would be happy to search through a larger data base that contains relevant financial details for all of UCLA, so long as the details for SBAC and CRESST are contained within and separately labeled.
I would like annual records spanning the lifetimes of each organization: SBAC only goes back several years, but CRESST goes back to the 1980s (in its early years, it was called the Center for the Study of Evaluation).
Please tell me what I need to do next.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Best Wishes, Richard Phelps
RE: Acknowledgement of Public Records Request – PRR # 17-4854
Dear Mr. Phelps:
This letter is to acknowledge your request under the California Public Records Act (CPRA) dated July 5, 2017, herein enclosed. Information Practices (IP) is notifying the appropriate UCLA offices of your request and will identify, review, and release all responsive documents in accordance with relevant law and University policy.
Under the CPRA, Cal. Gov't Code Section 6253(b), UCLA may charge for reproduction costs and/or programming services. If the cost is anticipated to be greater than $50.00 or the amount you authorized in your original request, we will contact you to confirm your continued interest in receiving the records and your agreement to pay the charges. Payment is due prior to the release of the records.
As required under Cal. Gov't Code Section 6253, UCLA will respond to your request no later than the close of business on July 14, 2017. Please note, though, that Section 6253 only requires a public agency to make a determination within 10 days as to whether or not a request is seeking records that are publicly disclosable and, if so, to provide the estimated date that the records will be made available. There is no requirement for a public agency to actually supply the records within 10 days of receiving a request, unless the requested records are readily available. Still, UCLA prides itself on always providing all publicly disclosable records in as timely a manner as possible.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (310) 794-8741 or via email at pahill@finance.ucla.edu and reference the PRR number found above in the subject line.
Paula Hill
Assistant Manager, Information Practices
RE: Public Records Request – PRR # 17-4854
The purpose of this letter is to confirm that UCLA Information Practices (IP) continues to work on your public records request dated July 5, 2017. As allowed pursuant to Cal. Gov't Code Section 6253(c), we require additional time to respond to your request, due to the following circumstance(s):
The need to search for and collect the requested records from field facilities or other establishments that are separate from the office processing the request.
IP will respond to your request no later than the close of business on July 28, 2017 with an estimated date that responsive documents will be made available.
Dear Mr. Phelps,
Please know UCLA Information Practices continues to work on your public records request, attached for your reference. I will provide a further response regarding your request no later than August 18, 2017.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (310) 794-8741 or via email and reference the PRR number found above in the subject line.
UCLA Information Practices
Thank you. RP
Dear Mr. Richard Phelps:
UCLA Information Practices (IP) continues to work on your public records request dated July 5, 2017. As required under Cal. Gov't Code Section 6253, and as noted in our email communication with you on July 28, 2017, we are now able to provide you with the estimated date that responsive documents will be made available to you, which is September 29, 2017.
As the records are still being compiled and/or reviewed, we are not able at this time to provide you with any potential costs, so that information will be furnished in a subsequent communication as soon as it is known.
Dear Mr. Richard Phelps,
Unfortunately, we must revise the estimated availability date regarding your attached request as the requisite review has not yet been completed. We expect to provide a complete response by November 30, 2017. We apologize for the delay.
Should you have any questions, please contact our office at (310) 794-8741 or via email, and reference the PRR number found above in the subject line.
I believe that if you are leaving it up to CRESST and SBAC to voluntarily provide the information, they will not be ready Nov. 30 either. RP
Surprise! SBAC and CRESST stonewall public records request for their financial records was originally published on Nonpartisan Education Blog
October 1, 2017 CRESST, SBAC, UCLALeave a comment
College prep, Common Core, Education policy, Education Reform, Ethics, K-12, Mathematics, Reading & Writing, research ethics, Richard P. Phelps, Testing/Assessment, Uncategorized
Fordham Institute's pretend research
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute has released a report, Evaluating the Content and Quality of Next Generation Assessments,[i] ostensibly an evaluative comparison of four testing programs, the Common Core-derived SBAC and PARCC, ACT's Aspire, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' MCAS.[ii] Of course, anyone familiar with Fordham's past work knew beforehand which tests would win.
This latest Fordham Institute Common Core apologia is not so much research as a caricature of it.
Instead of referencing a wide range of relevant research, Fordham references only friends from inside their echo chamber and others paid by the Common Core's wealthy benefactors. But, they imply that they have covered a relevant and adequately wide range of sources.
Instead of evaluating tests according to the industry standard Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, or any of dozens of other freely-available and well-vetted test evaluation standards, guidelines, or protocols used around the world by testing experts, they employ "a brand new methodology" specifically developed for Common Core, for the owners of the Common Core, and paid for by Common Core's funders.
Instead of suggesting as fact only that which has been rigorously evaluated and accepted as fact by skeptics, the authors continue the practice of Common Core salespeople of attributing benefits to their tests for which no evidence exists
Instead of addressing any of the many sincere, profound critiques of their work, as confident and responsible researchers would do, the Fordham authors tell their critics to go away—"If you don't care for the standards…you should probably ignore this study" (p. 4).
Instead of writing in neutral language as real researchers do, the authors adopt the practice of coloring their language as so many Common Core salespeople do, attaching nice-sounding adjectives and adverbs to what serves their interest, and bad-sounding words to what does not.
1. Common Core's primary private financier, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, pays the Fordham Institute handsomely to promote the Core and its associated testing programs.[iii] A cursory search through the Gates Foundation web site reveals $3,562,116 granted to Fordham since 2009 expressly for Common Core promotion or "general operating support."[iv] Gates awarded an additional $653,534 between 2006 and 2009 for forming advocacy networks, which have since been used to push Common Core. All of the remaining Gates-to-Fordham grants listed supported work promoting charter schools in Ohio ($2,596,812), reputedly the nation's worst.[v]
The other research entities involved in the latest Fordham study either directly or indirectly derive sustenance at the Gates Foundation dinner table:
the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO),[vi]
the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), co-holder of the Common Core copyright and author of the test evaluation "Criteria."[vii]
the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE), headed by Linda Darling-Hammond, the chief organizer of one of the federally-subsidized Common Core-aligned testing programs, the Smarter-Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC),[viii] and
Student Achievement Partners, the organization that claims to have inspired the Common Core standards[ix]
The Common Core's grandees have always only hired their own well-subsidized grantees for evaluations of their products. The Buros Center for Testing at the University of Nebraska has conducted test reviews for decades, publishing many of them in its annual Mental Measurements Yearbook for the entire world to see, and critique. Indeed, Buros exists to conduct test reviews, and retains hundreds of the world's brightest and most independent psychometricians on its reviewer roster. Why did Common Core's funders not hire genuine professionals from Buros to evaluate PARCC and SBAC? The non-psychometricians at the Fordham Institute would seem a vastly inferior substitute, …that is, had the purpose genuinely been an objective evaluation.
2. A second reason Fordham's intentions are suspect rests with their choice of evaluation criteria. The "bible" of North American testing experts is the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, jointly produced by the American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, and the American Educational Research Association. Fordham did not use it.[x]
Had Fordham compared the tests using the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (or any of a number of other widely-respected test evaluation standards, guidelines, or protocols[xi]) SBAC and PARCC would have flunked. They have yet to accumulate some the most basic empirical evidence of reliability, validity, or fairness, and past experience with similar types of assessments suggest they will fail on all three counts.[xii]
Instead, Fordham chose to reference an alternate set of evaluation criteria concocted by the organization that co-owns the Common Core standards and co-sponsored their development (Council of Chief State School Officers, or CCSSO), drawing on the work of Linda Darling-Hammond's SCOPE, the Center for Research on Educational Standards and Student Testing (CRESST), and a handful of others.[xiii],[xiv] Thus, Fordham compares SBAC and PARCC to other tests according to specifications that were designed for SBAC and PARCC.[xv]
The authors write "The quality and credibility of an evaluation of this type rests largely on the expertise and judgment of the individuals serving on the review panels" (p.12). A scan of the names of everyone in decision-making roles, however, reveals that Fordham relied on those they have hired before and whose decisions they could safely predict. Regardless, given the evaluation criteria employed, the outcome was foreordained regardless whom they hired to review, not unlike a rigged election in a dictatorship where voters' decisions are restricted to already-chosen candidates.
Still, PARCC and SBAC might have flunked even if Fordham had compared tests using all 24+ of CCSSO's "Criteria." But Fordham chose to compare on only 14 of the criteria.[xvi] And those just happened to be criteria mostly favoring PARCC and SBAC.
Without exception the Fordham study avoided all the evaluation criteria in the categories:
"Meet overall assessment goals and ensure technical quality",
"Yield valuable reports on student progress and performance",
"Adhere to best practices in test administration", and
"State specific criteria"[xvii]
What types of test characteristics can be found in these neglected categories? Test security, providing timely data to inform instruction, validity, reliability, score comparability across years, transparency of test design, requiring involvement of each state's K-12 educators and institutions of higher education, and more. Other characteristics often claimed for PARCC and SBAC, without evidence, cannot even be found in the CCSSO criteria (e.g., internationally benchmarked, backward mapping from higher education standards, fairness).
The report does not evaluate the "quality" of tests, as its title suggests; at best it is an alignment study. And, naturally, one would expect the Common Core consortium tests to be more aligned to the Common Core than other tests. The only evaluative criteria used from the CCSSO's Criteria are in the two categories "Align to Standards—English Language Arts" and "Align to Standards—Mathematics" and, even then, only for grades 5 and 8.
Nonetheless, the authors claim, "The methodology used in this study is highly comprehensive" (p. 74).
The authors of the Pioneer Institute's report How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students,[xviii] recommended strongly against the official adoption of PARCC after an analysis of its test items in reading and writing. They also did not recommend continuing with the current MCAS, which is also based on Common Core's mediocre standards, chiefly because the quality of the grade 10 MCAS tests in math and ELA has deteriorated in the past seven or so years for reasons that are not yet clear. Rather, they recommend that Massachusetts return to its effective pre-Common Core standards and tests and assign the development and monitoring of the state's mandated tests to a more responsible agency.
Perhaps the primary conceit of Common Core proponents is that the familiar multiple-choice/short answer/essay standardized tests ignore some, and arguably the better, parts of learning (the deeper, higher, more rigorous, whatever)[xix]. Ironically, it is they—opponents of traditional testing content and formats—who propose that standardized tests measure everything. By contrast, most traditional standardized test advocates do not suggest that standardized tests can or should measure any and all aspects of learning.
Consider this standard from the Linda Darling-Hammond, et al. source document for the CCSSO criteria:
"Research: Conduct sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem, narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate, and demonstrate understanding of the subject under investigation. Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, use advanced searches effectively, and assess the strengths and limitations of each source in terms of the specific task, purpose, and audience."[xx]
Who would oppose this as a learning objective? But, does it make sense as a standardized test component? How does one objectively and fairly measure "sustained research" in the one- or two-minute span of a standardized test question? In PARCC tests, this is simulated by offering students snippets of documentary source material and grading them as having analyzed the problem well if they cite two of those already-made-available sources.
But, that is not how research works. It is hardly the type of deliberation that comes to most people's mind when they think about "sustained research". Advocates for traditional standardized testing would argue that standardized tests should be used for what standardized tests do well; "sustained research" should be measured more authentically.
The authors of the aforementioned Pioneer Institute report recommend, as their 7th policy recommendation for Massachusetts:
"Establish a junior/senior-year interdisciplinary research paper requirement as part of the state's graduation requirements—to be assessed at the local level following state guidelines—to prepare all students for authentic college writing."[xxi]
PARCC, SBAC, and the Fordham Institute propose that they can validly, reliably, and fairly measure the outcome of what is normally a weeks- or months-long project in a minute or two. It is attempting to measure that which cannot be well measured on standardized tests that makes PARCC and SBAC tests "deeper" than others. In practice, the alleged deeper parts are the most convoluted and superficial.
Appendix A of the source document for the CCSSO criteria provides three international examples of "high-quality assessments" in Singapore, Australia, and England.[xxiii] None are standardized test components. Rather, all are projects developed over extended periods of time—weeks or months—as part of regular course requirements.
Common Core proponents scoured the globe to locate "international benchmark" examples of the type of convoluted (i.e., "higher", "deeper") test questions included in PARCC and SBAC tests. They found none.
3. The authors continue the Common Core sales tendency of attributing benefits to their tests for which no evidence exists. For example, the Fordham report claims that SBAC and PARCC will:
"make traditional 'test prep' ineffective" (p. 8)
"allow students of all abilities, including both at-risk and high-achieving youngsters, to demonstrate what they know and can do" (p. 8)
produce "test scores that more accurately predict students' readiness for entry-level coursework or training" (p. 11)
"reliably measure the essential skills and knowledge needed … to achieve college and career readiness by the end of high school" (p. 11)
"…accurately measure student progress toward college and career readiness; and provide valid data to inform teaching and learning." (p. 3)
eliminate the problem of "students … forced to waste time and money on remedial coursework." (p. 73)
help "educators [who] need and deserve good tests that honor their hard work and give useful feedback, which enables them to improve their craft and boost their students' success." (p. 73)
The Fordham Institute has not a shred of evidence to support any of these grandiose claims. They share more in common with carnival fortune telling than empirical research. Granted, most of the statements refer to future outcomes, which cannot be known with certainty. But, that just affirms how irresponsible it is to make such claims absent any evidence.
Furthermore, in most cases, past experience would suggest just the opposite of what Fordham asserts. Test prep is more, not less, likely to be effective with SBAC and PARCC tests because the test item formats are complex (or, convoluted), introducing more "construct irrelevant variance"—that is, students will get lower scores for not managing to figure out formats or computer operations issues, even if they know the subject matter of the test. Disadvantaged and at-risk students tend to be the most disadvantaged by complex formatting and new technology.
As for Common Core, SBAC, and PARCC eliminating the "problem of" college remedial courses, such will be done by simply cancelling remedial courses, whether or not they might be needed, and lowering college entry-course standards to the level of current remedial courses.
4. When not dismissing or denigrating SBAC and PARCC critiques, the Fordham report evades them, even suggesting that critics should not read it: "If you don't care for the standards…you should probably ignore this study" (p. 4).
Yet, cynically, in the very first paragraph the authors invoke the name of Sandy Stotsky, one of their most prominent adversaries, and a scholar of curriculum and instruction so widely respected she could easily have gotten wealthy had she chosen to succumb to the financial temptation of the Common Core's profligacy as so many others have. Stotsky authored the Fordham Institute's "very first study" in 1997, apparently. Presumably, the authors of this report drop her name to suggest that they are broad-minded. (It might also suggest that they are now willing to publish anything for a price.)
Tellingly, one will find Stotsky's name nowhere after the first paragraph. None of her (or anyone else's) many devastating critiques of the Common Core tests is either mentioned or referenced. Genuine research does not hide or dismiss its critiques; it addresses them.
Ironically, the authors write, "A discussion of [test] qualities, and the types of trade-offs involved in obtaining them, are precisely the kinds of conversations that merit honest debate." Indeed.
5. Instead of writing in neutral language as real researchers do, the authors adopt the habit of coloring their language as Common Core salespeople do. They attach nice-sounding adjectives and adverbs to what they like, and bad-sounding words to what they don't.
For PARCC and SBAC one reads:
"strong content, quality, and rigor"
"stronger tests, which encourage better, broader, richer instruction"
"tests that focus on the essential skills and give clear signals"
"major improvements over the previous generation of state tests"
"complex skills they are assessing."
"high-quality assessment"
"high-quality assessments"
"high-quality tests"
"high-quality test items"
"high quality and provide meaningful information"
"carefully-crafted tests"
"these tests are tougher"
"more rigorous tests that challenge students more than they have been challenged in the past"
For other tests one reads:
"low-quality assessments poorly aligned with the standards"
"will undermine the content messages of the standards"
"a best-in-class state assessment, the 2014 MCAS, does not measure many of the important competencies that are part of today's college and career readiness standards"
"have generally focused on low-level skills"
"have given students and parents false signals about the readiness of their children for postsecondary education and the workforce"
Appraising its own work, Fordham writes:
"groundbreaking evaluation"
"meticulously assembled panels"
"highly qualified yet impartial reviewers"
Considering those who have adopted SBAC or PARCC, Fordham writes:
"thankfully, states have taken courageous steps"
"states' adoption of college and career readiness standards has been a bold step in the right direction."
"adopting and sticking with high-quality assessments requires courage."
A few other points bear mentioning. The Fordham Institute was granted access to operational SBAC and PARCC test items. Over the course of a few months in 2015, the Pioneer Institute, a strong critic of Common Core, PARCC, and SBAC, appealed for similar access to PARCC items. The convoluted run-around responses from PARCC officials excelled at bureaucratic stonewalling. Despite numerous requests, Pioneer never received access.
The Fordham report claims that PARCC and SBAC are governed by "member states", whereas ACT Aspire is owned by a private organization. Actually, the Common Core Standards are owned by two private, unelected organizations, the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors' Association, and only each state's chief school officer sits on PARCC and SBAC panels. Individual states actually have far more say-so if they adopt ACT Aspire (or their own test) than if they adopt PARCC or SBAC. A state adopts ACT Aspire under the terms of a negotiated, time-limited contract. By contrast, a state or, rather, its chief state school officer, has but one vote among many around the tables at PARCC and SBAC. With ACT Aspire, a state controls the terms of the relationship. With SBAC and PARCC, it does not.[xxiv]
Just so you know, on page 71, Fordham recommends that states eliminate any tests that are not aligned to the Common Core Standards, in the interest of efficiency, supposedly.
In closing, it is only fair to mention the good news in the Fordham report. It promises on page 8, "We at Fordham don't plan to stay in the test-evaluation business".
[i] Nancy Doorey & Morgan Polikoff. (2016, February). Evaluating the content and quality of next generation assessments. With a Foreword by Amber M. Northern & Michael J. Petrilli. Washington, DC: Thomas P. Fordham Institute. http://edexcellence.net/publications/evaluating-the-content-and-quality-of-next-generation-assessments
[ii] PARCC is the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers; SBAC is the Smarter-Balanced Assessment Consortium; MCAS is the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System; ACT Aspire is not an acronym (though, originally ACT stood for American College Test).
[iii] The reason for inventing a Fordham Institute when a Fordham Foundation already existed may have had something to do with taxes, but it also allows Chester Finn, Jr. and Michael Petrilli to each pay themselves two six figure salaries instead of just one.
[iv] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/search#q/k=Fordham
[v] See, for example, http://www.ohio.com/news/local/charter-schools-misspend-millions-of-ohio-tax-dollars-as-efforts-to-police-them-are-privatized-1.596318 ; http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/03/ohios_charter_schools_ridicule.html ; http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/12/18/kasich-to-revamp-ohio-laws-on-charter-schools.html ; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/06/12/troubled-ohio-charter-schools-have-become-a-joke-literally/
[vi] HumRRO has produced many favorable reports for Common Core-related entities, including alignment studies in Kentucky, New York State, California, and Connecticut.
[vii] CCSSO has received 23 grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation from "2009 and earlier" to 2016 collectively exceeding $100 million. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=CCSSO
[viii] http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=%22Stanford%20Center%20for%20Opportunity%20Policy%20in%20Education%22
[ix] Student Achievement Partners has received four grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation from 2012 to 2015 exceeding $13 million. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=%22Student%20Achievement%20Partners%22
[x] The authors write that the standards they use are "based on" the real Standards. But, that is like saying that Cheez Whiz is based on cheese. Some real cheese might be mixed in there, but it's not the product's most distinguishing ingredient.
[xi] (e.g., the International Test Commission's (ITC) Guidelines for Test Use; the ITC Guidelines on Quality Control in Scoring, Test Analysis, and Reporting of Test Scores; the ITC Guidelines on the Security of Tests, Examinations, and Other Assessments; the ITC's International Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing; the European Federation of Psychologists' Association (EFPA) Test Review Model; the Standards of the Joint Committee on Testing Practices)
[xii] Despite all the adjectives and adverbs implying newness to PARCC and SBAC as "Next Generation Assessment", it has all been tried before and failed miserably. Indeed, many of the same persons involved in past fiascos are pushing the current one. The allegedly "higher-order", more "authentic", performance-based tests administered in Maryland (MSPAP), California (CLAS), and Kentucky (KIRIS) in the 1990s failed because of unreliable scores; volatile test score trends; secrecy of items and forms; an absence of individual scores in some cases; individuals being judged on group work in some cases; large expenditures of time; inconsistent (and some improper) test preparation procedures from school to school; inconsistent grading on open-ended response test items; long delays between administration and release of scores; little feedback for students; and no substantial evidence after several years that education had improved. As one should expect, instruction had changed as test proponents desired, but without empirical gains or perceived improvement in student achievement. Parents, politicians, and measurement professionals alike overwhelmingly rejected these dysfunctional tests.
See, for example, For California: Michael W. Kirst & Christopher Mazzeo, (1997, December). The Rise, Fall, and Rise of State Assessment in California: 1993-96, Phi Delta Kappan, 78(4) Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session, (1998, January 21). National Testing: Hearing, Granada Hills, CA. Serial No. 105-74; Representative Steven Baldwin, (1997, October). Comparing assessments and tests. Education Reporter, 141. See also Klein, David. (2003). "A Brief History Of American K-12 Mathematics Education In the 20th Century", In James M. Royer, (Ed.), Mathematical Cognition, (pp. 175–226). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. For Kentucky: ACT. (1993). "A study of core course-taking patterns. ACT-tested graduates of 1991-1993 and an investigation of the relationship between Kentucky's performance-based assessment results and ACT-tested Kentucky graduates of 1992". Iowa City, IA: Author; Richard Innes. (2003). Education research from a parent's point of view. Louisville, KY: Author. http://www.eddatafrominnes.com/index.html ; KERA Update. (1999, January). Misinformed, misled, flawed: The legacy of KIRIS, Kentucky's first experiment. For Maryland: P. H. Hamp, & C. B. Summers. (2002, Fall). "Education." In P. H. Hamp & C. B. Summers (Eds.), A guide to the issues 2002–2003. Maryland Public Policy Institute, Rockville, MD. http://www.mdpolicy.org/docLib/20051030Education.pdf ; Montgomery County Public Schools. (2002, Feb. 11). "Joint Teachers/Principals Letter Questions MSPAP", Public Announcement, Rockville, MD. http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=644 ; HumRRO. (1998). Linking teacher practice with statewide assessment of education. Alexandria, VA: Author. http://www.humrro.org/corpsite/page/linking-teacher-practice-statewide-assessment-education
[xiii]http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2014/CCSSO Criteria for High Quality Assessments 03242014.pdf
[xiv] A rationale is offered for why they had to develop a brand new set of test evaluation criteria (p. 13). Fordham claims that new criteria were needed, which weighted some criteria more than others. But, weights could easily be applied to any criteria, including the tried-and-true, preexisting ones.
[xv] For an extended critique of the CCSSO Criteria employed in the Fordham report, see "Appendix A. Critique of Criteria for Evaluating Common Core-Aligned Assessments" in Mark McQuillan, Richard P. Phelps, & Sandra Stotsky. (2015, October). How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students. Boston: Pioneer Institute, pp. 62-68. http://pioneerinstitute.org/news/testing-the-tests-why-mcas-is-better-than-parcc/
[xvi] Doorey & Polikoff, p. 14.
[xvii] MCAS bests PARCC and SBAC according to several criteria specific to the Commonwealth, such as the requirements under the current Massachusetts Education Reform Act (MERA) as a grade 10 high school exit exam, that tests students in several subject fields (and not just ELA and math), and provides specific and timely instructional feedback.
[xviii] McQuillan, M., Phelps, R.P., & Stotsky, S. (2015, October). How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students. Boston: Pioneer Institute. http://pioneerinstitute.org/news/testing-the-tests-why-mcas-is-better-than-parcc/
[xix] It is perhaps the most enlightening paradox that, among Common Core proponents' profuse expulsion of superlative adjectives and adverbs advertising their "innovative", "next generation" research results, the words "deeper" and "higher" mean the same thing.
[xx] The document asserts, "The Common Core State Standards identify a number of areas of knowledge and skills that are clearly so critical for college and career readiness that they should be targeted for inclusion in new assessment systems." Linda Darling-Hammond, Joan Herman, James Pellegrino, Jamal Abedi, J. Lawrence Aber, Eva Baker, Randy Bennett, Edmund Gordon, Edward Haertel, Kenji Hakuta, Andrew Ho, Robert Lee Linn, P. David Pearson, James Popham, Lauren Resnick, Alan H. Schoenfeld, Richard Shavelson, Lorrie A. Shepard, Lee Shulman, and Claude M. Steele. (2013). Criteria for high-quality assessment. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education; Center for Research on Student Standards and Testing, University of California at Los Angeles; and Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Illinois at Chicago, p. 7. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/publications/pubs/847
[xxi] McQuillan, Phelps, & Stotsky, p. 46.
[xxiii] Linda Darling-Hammond, et al., pp. 16-18. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/publications/pubs/847
[xxiv] For an in-depth discussion of these governance issues, see Peter Wood's excellent Introduction to Drilling Through the Core, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0985208694
Fordham Institute's pretend research was originally published on Nonpartisan Education Blog
February 12, 2016 CCSSO, CRESST, evaluation, Fordham Institute, Gates Foundation, guidelines, HumRRO, protocols, review, rigor, SCOPE, standards, Student Achievement Partners, testingLeave a comment
Common Core, Education policy, Education Reform, Mathematics, Reading & Writing, research ethics, Richard P. Phelps, Testing/Assessment
Fordham report predictable, conflicted
On November 17, the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) will decide the fate of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) and the Partnership for Assessment of College Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) in the Bay State. MCAS is homegrown; PARCC is not. Barring unexpected compromises or subterfuges, only one program will survive.
Over the past year, PARCC promoters have released a stream of reports comparing the two testing programs. The latest arrives from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in the form of a partial "evaluation of the content and quality of the 2014 MCAS and PARCC "relative to" the "Criteria for High Quality Assessments"[i] developed by one of the organizations that developed Common Core's standards—with the rest of the report to be delivered in January, it says.[ii]
PARCC continues to insult our intelligence. The language of the "special report" sent to Mitchell Chester, Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, reads like a legitimate study.[iii] The research it purports to have done even incorporated some processes typically employed in studies with genuine intentions of objectivity.
No such intentions could validly be ascribed to the Fordham report.
First, Common Core's primary private financier, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, pays the Fordham Institute handsomely to promote the standards and its associated testing programs. A cursory search through the Gates Foundation web site reveals $3,562,116 granted to Fordham since 2009 expressly for Common Core promotion or "general operating support."[iv] Gates awarded an additional $653,534 between 2006 and 2009 for forming advocacy networks, which have since been used to push Common Core. All of the remaining Gates-to-Fordham grants listed supported work promoting charter schools in Ohio ($2,596,812), reputedly the nation's worst.[v]
– the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO), which will deliver another pro-PARCC report sometime soon,[vi]
– the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), co-holder of the Common Core copyright and author of the "Criteria.", [vii]
– the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE), headed by Linda Darling-Hammond, the chief organizer of the other federally-subsidized Common Core-aligned testing program, the Smarter-Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC),[viii] and
– Student Achievement Partners, the organization that claims to have inspired the Common Core standards[ix]
Fordham acknowledges the pervasive conflicts of interest it claims it faced in locating people to evaluate MCAS versus PARCC. "…it is impossible to find individuals with zero conflicts who are also experts".[x] But, the statement is false; hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of individuals experienced in "alignment or assessment development studies" were available.[xi] That they were not called reveals Fordham's preferences.
A second reason Fordham's intentions are suspect rests with their choice of evaluation criteria. The "bible" of test developers is the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, jointly produced by the American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, and the American Educational Research Association. Fordham did not use it.
Instead, Fordham chose to reference an alternate set of evaluation criteria concocted by the organization that co-sponsored the development of Common Core's standards (Council for Chief State School Officers, or CCSSO), drawing on the work of Linda Darling-Hammond's SCOPE, the Center for Research on Educational Standards and Student Testing (CRESST), and a handful of others. Thus, Fordham compares PARCC to MCAS according to specifications that were designed for PARCC.[xii]
Had Fordham compared MCAS and PARCC using the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, MCAS would have passed and PARCC would have flunked. PARCC has not yet accumulated the most basic empirical evidence of reliability, validity, or fairness, and past experience with similar types of assessments suggest it will fail on all three counts.[xiii]
Third, PARCC should have been flunked had Fordham compared MCAS and PARCC using all 24+ of CCSSO's "Criteria." But Fordham chose to compare on only 15 of the criteria.[xiv] And those just happened to be the criteria favoring PARCC.
Fordham agreed to compare the two tests with respect to their alignment to Common Core-based criteria. With just one exception, the Fordham study avoided all the criteria in the groups "Meet overall assessment goals and ensure technical quality", "Yield valuable report on student progress and performance", "Adhere to best practices in test administration", and "State specific criteria"[xv]
Not surprisingly, Fordham's "memo" favors the Bay State's adoption of PARCC. However, the authors of How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students[xvi], released one week before Fordham's "memo," recommend strongly against the official adoption of PARCC after an analysis of its test items in reading and writing. They also do not recommend continuing with the current MCAS, which is also based on Common Core's mediocre standards, chiefly because the quality of the grade 10 MCAS tests in math and ELA has deteriorated in the past seven or so years for reasons that are not yet clear. Rather, they recommend that Massachusetts return to its effective pre-Common Core standards and tests and assign the development and monitoring of the state's mandated tests to a more responsible agency.
Perhaps the primary conceit of Common Core proponents is that ordinary multiple-choice-predominant standardized tests ignore some, and arguably the better, parts of learning (the deeper, higher, more rigorous, whatever)[xvii]. Ironically, it is they—opponents of traditional testing regimes—who propose that standardized tests measure everything. By contrast, most traditional standardized test advocates do not suggest that standardized tests can or should measure any and all aspects of learning.
"Research: Conduct sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem, narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate, and demonstrate understanding of the subject under investigation. Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, use advanced searches effectively, and assess the strengths and limitations of each source in terms of the specific task, purpose, and audience."[xviii]
Who would oppose this as a learning objective? But, does it make sense as a standardized test component? How does one objectively and fairly measure "sustained research" in the one- or two-minute span of a standardized test question? In PARCC tests, this is done by offering students snippets of documentary source material and grading them as having analyzed the problem well if they cite two of those already-made-available sources.
"Establish a junior/senior-year interdisciplinary research paper requirement as part of the state's graduation requirements—to be assessed at the local level following state guidelines—to prepare all students for authentic college writing."[xix]
PARCC and the Fordham Institute propose that they can validly, reliably, and fairly measure the outcome of what is normally a weeks- or months-long project in a minute or two.[xx] It is attempting to measure that which cannot be well measured on standardized tests that makes PARCC tests "deeper" than others. In practice, the alleged deeper parts of PARCC are the most convoluted and superficial.
Appendix A of the source document for the CCSSO criteria provides three international examples of "high-quality assessments" in Singapore, Australia, and England.[xxi] None are standardized test components. Rather, all are projects developed over extended periods of time—weeks or months—as part of regular course requirements.
Dr. Richard P. Phelps is editor or author of four books: Correcting Fallacies about Educational and Psychological Testing (APA, 2008/2009); Standardized Testing Primer (Peter Lang, 2007); Defending Standardized Testing (Psychology Press, 2005); and Kill the Messenger (Transaction, 2003, 2005), and founder of the Nonpartisan Education Review (http://nonpartisaneducation.org).
[i] http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2014/CCSSO%20Criteria%20for%20High%20Quality%20Assessments%20 03242014.pdf
[ii] Michael J. Petrilli & Amber M. Northern. (2015, October 30). Memo to Dr. Mitchell Chester, Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Washington, DC: Thomas P. Fordham Institute. http://edexcellence.net/articles/evaluation-of-the-content-and-quality-of-the-2014-mcas-and-parcc-relative-to-the-ccsso
[iii] Nancy Doorey & Morgan Polikoff. (2015, October). Special report: Evaluation of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) and the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). Washington, DC: Thomas P. Fordham Institute. http://edexcellence.net/articles/evaluation-of-the-content-and-quality-of-the-2014-mcas-and-parcc-relative-to-the-ccsso
[vii] CCSSO has received 22 grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation from "2009 and earlier" to 2015 exceeding $90 million. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=CCSSO
[x] Doorey & Polikoff, p. 4.
[xi] To cite just one example, the world-renowned Center for Educational Measurement at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst has accumulated abundant experience conducting alignment studies.
[xii] For an extended critique of the CCSSO criteria employed in the Fordham report, see "Appendix A. Critique of Criteria for Evaluating Common Core-Aligned Assessments" in Mark McQuillan, Richard P. Phelps, & Sandra Stotsky. (2015, October). How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students. Boston: Pioneer Institute, pp. 62-68. http://pioneerinstitute.org/news/testing-the-tests-why-mcas-is-better-than-parcc/
[xiii] Despite all the adjectives and adverbs implying newness to PARCC and SBAC as "Next Generation Assessment", it has all been tried before and failed miserably. Indeed, many of the same persons involved in past fiascos are pushing the current one. The allegedly "higher-order", more "authentic", performance-based tests administered in Maryland (MSPAP), California (CLAS), and Kentucky (KIRIS) in the 1990s failed because of unreliable scores; volatile test score trends; secrecy of items and forms; an absence of individual scores in some cases; individuals being judged on group work in some cases; large expenditures of time; inconsistent (and some improper) test preparation procedures from school to school; inconsistent grading on open-ended response test items; long delays between administration and release of scores; little feedback for students; and no substantial evidence after several years that education had improved. As one should expect, instruction had changed as test proponents desired, but without empirical gains or perceived improvement in student achievement. Parents, politicians, and measurement professionals alike overwhelmingly rejected these dysfunctional tests.
[xiv] Doorey & Polikoff, p. 23.
[xv] MCAS bests PARCC according to several criteria specific to the Commonwealth, such as the requirements under the current Massachusetts Education Reform Act (MERA) as a grade 10 high school exit exam, that tests students in several subject fields (and not just ELA and math), and provides specific and timely instructional feedback.
[xvi] McQuillan, M., Phelps, R.P., & Stotsky, S. (2015, October). How PARCC's false rigor stunts the academic growth of all students. Boston: Pioneer Institute. http://pioneerinstitute.org/news/testing-the-tests-why-mcas-is-better-than-parcc/
[xvii] It is perhaps the most enlightening paradox that, among Common Core proponents' profuse expulsion of superlative adjectives and adverbs advertising their "innovative", "next generation" research results, the words "deeper" and "higher" mean the same thing.
[xviii] The document asserts, "The Common Core State Standards identify a number of areas of knowledge and skills that are clearly so critical for college and career readiness that they should be targeted for inclusion in new assessment systems." Linda Darling-Hammond, Joan Herman, James Pellegrino, Jamal Abedi, J. Lawrence Aber, Eva Baker, Randy Bennett, Edmund Gordon, Edward Haertel, Kenji Hakuta, Andrew Ho, Robert Lee Linn, P. David Pearson, James Popham, Lauren Resnick, Alan H. Schoenfeld, Richard Shavelson, Lorrie A. Shepard, Lee Shulman, and Claude M. Steele. (2013). Criteria for high-quality assessment. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education; Center for Research on Student Standards and Testing, University of California at Los Angeles; and Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Illinois at Chicago, p. 7. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/publications/pubs/847
[xix] McQuillan, Phelps, & Stotsky, p. 46.
[xxi] Linda Darling-Hammond, et al., pp. 16-18. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/publications/pubs/847
Fordham report predictable, conflicted was originally published on Nonpartisan Education Blog
November 12, 2015 academic rigor, Common Core, education standards, Fordham Institute, MCAS, PARCC, predictive validity, research biasLeave a comment
Common Core, Education policy, K-12, research ethics, Richard Innes, Testing/Assessment
Selling 'Performance' Assessments with Inaccurate Pictures from Kentucky
By Richard Innes, new in the Nonpartisan Education Review.
See more at: http://nonpartisaneducation.org/Review/Articles/v11n1.htm#sthash.mGQ6Mqbh.dpuf
Selling 'Performance' Assessments with Inaccurate Pictures from Kentucky was originally published on Nonpartisan Education Blog
March 14, 2015 Common Core, Kentucky, KIRIS, Linda Darling-Hammond, performance tests, SBAC, standardized testingLeave a comment
Keeping Journalists in the Dark: 'Citation Cartels' Limit Public Knowledge
Cartoons about Grades and Report Cards
Just Call Me Teacher — The Effortful Educator


The MCSkin3D brings more utility than just adding content to Minecraft. This tool is useful for players who want to create their own custom skins like someone who finally realised that he or she was tired of the way Steve looks. It seamlessly combined 2D and 3D painting effects to support players in creating some top-quality Minecraft skins. You've got to install this tool before you start. Don't forget to give it a file of its own in a place you'll easily remember instead of installing it directory to your Minecraft. However, don't dump it into your Minecraft folder to avoid crashes and other problems.
Somebody might wonder if this tool is a sort of clone of SkinCraft or a number of other skin-crafting mods. However, that's not true. The MCSkin3D is a great tool for people who want to make something professional for their own personal use or share with the Minecraft community at large. You don't need to be an excellent painter to use this tool, but knowledge of programs like Photoshop and other software that focuses on manipulating images can be helpful. Because this tool doesn't really get installed to Minecraft, it works efficiently with every version of the game. Skins are just skins, no matter what.
Supports 1.8 skin format, as well as some other minor issues!
Fixed long-standing issue of disappearing limbs.
Techne support is still a bit iffy but better.


text:
Q: Redefine def by itself without evaluate If I have \csname var:\foo\endcsname, how can I do that : \expandafter\gdef\csname var:\foo\endcsname{\csname var:\foo\endcsname, \bar} ?
I know I can do it with edef (or xdef for global), but in my situation I can't evaluate the variables at the definition, because they contain something like \pageref{\tmplabel}}
It is possible to replace a global variable by itself, without evaluate it?
Maybe with \let ? But I didn't success.
Thousands of thanks

A: You seem to want to append something to \csname var:\foo\endcsname.
\def\appendto#1#2{%
  \expandafter\gdef\csname #1\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\endcsname\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter{\csname #1\endcsname,#2}%
}

Example:
\def\appendto#1#2{%
  \expandafter\gdef\csname #1\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\endcsname
  \expandafter\expandafter\expandafter{\csname #1\endcsname,#2}%
}

\def\foo{foo}
\expandafter\def\csname var:\foo\endcsname{start}

\appendto{var:\foo}{\bar}

\expandafter\show\csname var:\foo\endcsname

The terminal would show
> \var:foo=macro:
->start,\bar .

The trick is to force two expansion steps of \csname before carrying out the \gdef.
Without \expandafter:
\input expl3-generic

\ExplSyntaxOn

\cs_new_protected:Npn \dufays_append:Nn #1 #2
 {
  \tl_put_right:Nn #1 { , #2 }
 }
\cs_generate_variant:Nn \dufays_append:Nn { c }
\cs_set_eq:NN \appendto \dufays_append:cn

\ExplSyntaxOff

\def\foo{foo}
\expandafter\def\csname var:\foo\endcsname{start}

\appendto{var:\foo}{\bar}

\expandafter\show\csname var:\foo\endcsname

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Great news for Grand Lake!
Looking for Grand Lake Internet service providers? Grand Lake locals choose Comcast. Change the way you WiFi with Xfinity xFi. Get the speeds, coverage, and control you need to enjoy the ultimate home WiFi experience. Grand Lake high-speed Internet fans can now enjoy consistently fast speeds even during peak hours, when everyone's online enjoying high-speed Internet.
Grand Lake residents, listen up! Comcast delivers the high-speed Internet Grand Lake, CO has been waiting for. Get Xfinity Internet today!
In the Grand Lake, Colorado area, Xfinity Internet service from Comcast gives you reliably fast download speeds when you need them most.
Grand Lake Internet customers enjoy everything the Web has to offer with Xfinity service, including downloading HD movies, uploading photos, streaming TV shows or simply surfing for fun.
Great news for fans of fast Internet! Grand Lake, Colorado hotspots are better than ever! Grand Lake hotspots users on the go now have access to reliable WiFi hotspots from Xfinity all around the city.


The Yamaha TransAcoustic FG-TA 6-string acoustic-electric guitar is a high-quality instrument that delivers an acoustic experience like no other guitar before it. With Yamaha's onboard TransAcoustic reverb and chorus effects, you'll enjoy the tones of playing in a rich and lively acoustic space no matter where you are. The FG-TA features a dreadnought body with mahogany back and sides and a solid Sitka spruce top. You'll love the feel of this guitar's fast-action neck and smooth, bound rosewood fingerboard. The Yamaha TransAcoustic FG-TA will add new inspiration to your playing.
Yamaha's groundbreaking TransAcoustic technology delivers onboard reverb and chorus effects. What sets TransAcoustic guitars apart from other instruments with onboard effects is that they don't require any external amplification. Engage the effects via the simple-to-use controls, and it's like you're playing in a rich, ambient venue — no amp or PA required. And when it's time for the gig, you can access those same great tones plugged in through the guitar's System70 + SRT Piezo pickup system.
The key to TransAcoustic is an integrated actuator, a small device hidden inside the guitar. The vibration of the instrument's strings cause the actuator to vibrate; these vibrations are transmitted to the guitar body, as well as the air around the guitar. The result is authentic reverb and chorus — without the need for any additional amplification or effects.