text:
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Home vs. School Influence
Ken DeRosa, over at D-Ed Reckoning, took the time to thoughtfully respond to a lot of what I had to say (he disagrees with me) and I'd like to respond to some of his comments.
*The first point he makes is that my assignment of causality to home factors over school factors is suspect. He has a point. I can't be 100% sure about that. I didn't rigorously evaluate student attitudes toward school, survey parents, observe home environments, run regressions, etc. I did not use rigorous research methodology to determine what caused what and, as such, I won't be publishing it in an academic journal anytime soon. But what I did do is spend all day in the school for two years straight. I taught about 70 different kids in my two classes, and probably at least a thousand others while covering other classes. I held conferences with parents. I got to know students. I talked to teachers. I observed other classrooms. In short, I knew the school inside and out. I can't empirically prove that home factors matter more than school ones, but I have plenty of good reasons to believe it. There's certainly no way to disprove my theory either.
His second point that he makes surrounding validity is that the students' behavior was confounded by previous academic experience. All the kids should have attended school for at least 5 years prior to coming to our school (NYC doesn't mandate kindergarten), and I know very little about those experiences or how they affected learning and behavior. This is true. If I were publishing this in a journal, it would be a major weakness if not a fatal flaw. Again, I can't be 100% sure -- but given my in-depth knowledge of the situation, I'm fairly confident in my position.
*DeRosa says that behavioral problems weren't caused by poor home environments but, rather, by poor management and instructional strategies. Given that DeRosa has never, to my knowledge, stepped foot in my school it's hard for him to know exactly what was happening and why. That said, I agree to some extent. My classroom management skills were lacking, as were most of the other new teachers'. My training was not enough, and I (and other teachers) certainly could have used better techniques. But he'll have to trust me when I say that I've managed plenty of kids in plenty of situations in my lifetime and that the kids in this school were different. They were angrier. They were more defiant. They had less self-control. Of course the adults in the building failed to do enough to create a positive and structured environment, but doing so was much, much harder than it should have been because of the social norms to which the kids were exposed outside of school.
In summary of what went wrong at my school, let me be clear: myself and the other adults in the school failed the kids in many, many ways. The school was poorly run. I lacked adequate training. We could have done any number of things better (especially around discipline) and it would have helped the situation. But I stand by my assertion that the largest cause of problems at the school was the home life of the children. And I apologize for the obscene length of this post, but I'm going to explain why.
1.) When I started teaching I was convinced that the reason why schools such as mine were failing was because they were underfunded and that the teachers didn't work hard enough. I was at least 100% confident that I could turn around the life of every student I encountered. I believed I could overcome every problem they've faced simply by being inspiring, demanding, and generally awesome. But I slowly came to realize that this was not the case.
I saw many problems in my school, including: incompetent administrators (not all of them, mind you), high teacher turnover (and, therefore, inexperienced teachers), few resources and supplies, a dilapidated building, etc. I wanted to believe that with the right policies that we could be as good as any other school, but here's what I realized (and feel free to disagree on this point). If you were to lift a school from, say, Scarsdale and plop it down where our school was and then plop our school down where theirs was, you would have an interesting experiment. Our school, with the lack of resources, inexperienced teachers, etc. would now be populated by wealthy suburban kids. The Scarsdale school, with much higher expenditures, more experienced teachers, nicer facilities, smaller classes, etc. would be populated by our kids. Which school would be better?
Before I started teaching, I would've thought that the former Scarsdale school would be better. No longer. In my mind, our school would instantly become superior once it was populated by kids who were well-fed, well-adjusted, well-behaved, and had involved parents. In other words, all the of the structural factors matter less than the population of the school.
2.) My final summer in the Bronx, I taught at a private school that ran a special summer program for public school kids who had fallen behind. I taught Math, which I'd never taught before. The students came from the same neighborhoods (there was an income cap to get into the program). Despite this, the program was an unmitigated success. Students came to school on-time and ready to learn. Students smiled. Students listened when I talked. Students completed homework. Students learned. I had fun.
What was different? Certainly the program was well-run. Classes were capped at 15. I had two or three high school mentors as assistants in each class. The facilities were shiny (they even washed the board for me at night!). The teachers were good. All these things made a difference, but the largest difference was the home environment from which these kids came. The students had parents who went out of their way to apply to a selective program, come in for face-to-face interviews, make sure their kids attended so that they would be allowed to remain, and attended parent day even though they had to take a day off work.
To be fair, the program was selective and had no qualms about removing students who didn't show up or didn't cooperate. As a result, we were left with kids that came from stable families but that lived in poor neighborhoods.
Again, I have no empirical evidence -- but my experiences have convinced me that the home lives of these students contributed more to the success of the program than did the competency of the adults involved. I'm not arguing that the other stuff didn't matter, just that it mattered less than what happened at home.
3.) DeRosa argues that "The problems Corey sees may start at home, but there is no reason to believe that they cannot be solved and compensated for by schools." I disagree. I see no reason why they can't be assuaged, but schools with current levels of resources will never fully overcome what happens at home.
I'm sure just about everybody reading this could point out a school or ten that have overcome this. First of all, an exception doesn't disprove a rule. Secondly, many of the schools that have overcome home disadvantages go far beyond what we normally expect schools to do. Take KIPP schools for example, students not only self-select but are asked to leave (or simply told they will be held back if they stay) when they don't cooperate. The schools run, I believe, about 9-10 hours per day. Millions of dollars in grants are brought in to provide all sorts of extra opportunities. I think this is great. I would encourage many of the kids that I taught to go to a KIPP school if they could, but it doesn't accurately reflect what we'd normally expect schools to do.
Take, as another example, the SEED school in D.C. By all accounts, it has been tremendously successful. But it's a boarding school. If that's what it takes to overcome disadvantages stemming from students' home lives, then I'm all for it -- but we can't reasonably expect all inner-city schools to become boarding schools.
As a final example, let me provide one more anecdote. The leader of YES! Prep in Houston was on campus to speak in the fall. He opened with a question that read something to the effect of "can a school educate poor students as well as wealthy ones when they have the same resources?" And their answer was "YES!" As far as I could tell, the school did a phenomenal job. They had a dedicated staff that went the extra mile to make sure students succeeded. But they didn't provide the same resources as a suburban school, they provided the same resources as both a suburban school and a suburban family. They had extended school hours and all sorts of social activities. They raised money to provide their kids with college scholarships. They raised money to take their kids on college visits and on weekend trips to museums, plays, etc.
In short, I'm not arguing that it's not possible for a school to overcome a great deal of what happens at home, but rather that it's not possible given our current level of school resources. If somebody can figure out a way to fund a doubling of school hours, cultural trips, college visits, etc. then I'll be more open to considering schools as a full remedy for social ills rather than a partial one. Let's not forget that once a student is old enough to attend school they only spend about 22% of their waking hours inside a school building. The other 78% of the time, not to mention the first 5 or 6 years of their lives, have an awful lot of influence ((180*7/365*16) = .22).
4.) Last point, I promise. Let me get away from personal anecdotes and move on to some research. The Coleman Report was commissioned in the 1960's to prove that poor kids (especially African-Americans in segregated schools) were failing because their schools didn't have enough resources. Instead, it found that home life mattered more than what happened in school. It's now been about 42 years since the study was released, and countless follow-up studies have confirmed this finding. If there's any certainty in education policy research, it's that homes influence academic achievement more than schools.
The only exception of which I'm aware is what's known as the "Heyneman-Loxley Effect" based on a paper written by Stephen Heyneman and William Loxley in 1983. The pair studied 29 countries and examined the influence of home vs. school. They found a strong correlation (-.72) between the GNP of a country and the percentage influence of home vs. that of school. In other words, schools mattered more in poor countries and homes mattered more in rich countries.
In Conclusion: I stand by my assertion that the largest problem affecting my school was the home lives of our students. This does not mean that I made excuses rather than working hard. If anything, this motivated me to work harder. This does not mean that schools can't make a world of difference. I wouldn't be studying education if I didn't think it could make a difference in students' lives. What this means is that problems exist both inside and outside of schools -- and that schools can't fix everything.
29 comments:
- RDT said...
In short, I'm not arguing that it's not possible for a school to overcome a great deal of what happens at home, but rather that it's not possible given our current level of school resources. If somebody can figure out a way to fund a doubling of school hours, cultural trips, college visits, etc. then I'll be more open to considering schools as a full remedly for social ills rather than a partial one.
I think you've summarized the issue very well here. Schools can do a lot, but I don't believe they can do near enough at 6 hours a day and 30 kids per class.
My sense is that the people who resist recognizing this believe that there is a corps of Mother Theresas out there waiting to teach in low income schools -- putting in the extra hours, accepting lower wages to facilitate lower class size, etc -- if only the evil education bureaucracy would let them. Maybe there are more than schools recruit now -- but I don't think there are near enough to staff every low income school in the country. - June 18, 2008 at 2:15 PM
- ms-teacher said...
Just so you know, I responded to D-Ed's post stating that I didn't completely agree with what he wrote. Also know and I'm sure you've heard this, the first two years of teaching is tough for almost everybody. In fact, I don't think I've really hit my stride until this past year - going into my 7th year of teaching!
When we have constant teacher turn-over due to lack of support in our highest needs school, it is a tough environment to be in. At the end of the school year in my school, 4 of our 8 sixth grade teachers are leaving. Two have only been teaching for a couple of years, whereas the other two can no longer afford to teach in our district (both just recently had babies).
I think it is wrong to assume that if a teacher has ongoing problems in the classroom with a group of students that this is solely their fault. The reality is that we, as teachers, only have them for a short amount of time. When I see the same students continue to have problems for the three years they are at my school, I've got to figure that the only constant is the student. The student is exposed, at minimum, to 12 different teachers while they attend my middle school, whereas the teachers themselves are exposed to well over 150 students each school year.
Until we are able to have the same luxuries as private schools and charters school of holding students accountable for their actions, we may not be able to reach (or teach) some of our most difficult students.
Finally, while I have definitely implemented many of the strategies I learned from my DI trainings, I simply wasn't able to change the behaviors of all my students. - June 18, 2008 at 3:08 PM
- KDeRosa said...
DeRosa says that behavioral problems weren't caused by poor home environments but, rather, by poor management and instructional strategies.
This is not quite my position.
My position is that these kids are different from middle-class kids. They need better instruction and a more structured and carefully managed classroom than middle-class kids. They need compensatory education and they aren't getting it.
I'll explain why in my next post. - June 18, 2008 at 3:21 PM
- skoolboy said...
Perhaps it's an artifact of attending Vanderbilt, where Steve Heyneman teaches, that leads you to cite the Heyneman-Loxley effect, but there's more recent data on the relative importance of family background and school in cross-national perspecttive. See David Baker, Brian Goesling, and Gerald LeTendre's (2002) article in Comparative Education Review. Still, I agree with your analysis.
- June 18, 2008 at 3:25 PM
- Corey Bunje Bower said...
Yeah, I've presented multiple times on the Baker, Goesling, and LeTendre's article. They made a valiant effort, but TIMSS just didn't have the depth of information they needed -- take a look at the R squareds in that article vs. the original Heyneman & Loxley article. Gameron & Long (2006) combined the two plus data from Long's dissertation and found that the trend holds up to about $16,000 per capita GDP.
- June 18, 2008 at 3:53 PM
- Corey Bunje Bower said...
Besides, the Baker, Goesling, and LeTendre piece found even more countries where home matters more than school.
- June 18, 2008 at 3:54 PM
"Before I started teaching, I would've thought that the former Scarsdale school would be better. No longer. In my mind, our school would instantly become superior once it was populated by kids who were well-fed, well-adjusted, well-behaved, and had involved parents. In other words, all the of the structural factors matter less than the population of the school."
I couldn't agree with you more. My personal example: I used to teach in the large San Diego City School district. I worked as a teacher, student teacher, or sub in several high schools and middle schools.
It was a great experiment in the effects of school resources vs. pupil characteristics for the following reason: Almost every school in the district had the same resources: teacher-pupil ratio, building age/quality, supplies, budget. However, huge gaps existed in performance between the wealthier schools and schools with low-income students and high immigrant populations.
I can attest that the SCHOOL factors were basically the same everywhere in the district - the difference was the kids and their families.
There was no question that the schools with the higher income, stable, English-speaking families had higher performing students than the other schools. Aside from the fact that teachers tended to stay longer at the higher-income schools, the only variable which explained this performance difference was the composition of the student population.
Anyone who thinks that all low-income students will do just as well as suburban kids once they attend "high quality" schools should take a look at San Diego City Schools. As you noted, for schools to succeed with at-risk students, the school must act as both school and family for the student, b/c they need so much more. - June 18, 2008 at 4:21 PM
I so agree with your blog post!! I am not a teacher but a parent who wants to see more focus on involving parents and kids into the educational process. Honestly, many parents from all different social economic backgrounds don't know what to do. I believe our educational leaders need to do a better job of preparing kids and parents for that first day of school. Where are the public service announcements that ask: Is your child able to identify the alphabet letters all mixed up? Do they know basic shapes and colors? Can they identify their numbers 0-10 mixed up? Can they identify penny, nickel and dime? We really need a program designed to empower parents and kids into the educational process along with teachers because if a parent isn't involved at Kindergarten, they won't be involved at Second, Third and beyond. It's like the Seat Belt Law: teach a child to wear their seatbelt and they will re-teach big brother, grandma, dad and mom to wear it too. If you teach a child that each night they need to involve their parents into the process of reading with them for 10 minutes, playing a fun activity for 10 minutes and having conversations with lots of open ended questions, it might work. If you teach a child to ask their parents to go through their backpack with them each night and teach them to tell their parent about their day at school and teach them to want to be involved in school, many will pass that along to their parents. To me figuring out how to involve parents and kids into the process is the key!
Smiles - Stacey
www.cedarvalleypublishing.com - June 18, 2008 at 5:42 PM
- KDeRosa said...
I don't think I need to point out in this forum that correlation does not equal causation.
No one disputes the correlation between SES and student achievement. What is disputed (and which has not yet been established) is the notion that improving the SES of low-SES students will lead to an increase in their achievement.
The small scale controlled research is decidedly mixed and the large scale controlled research is non-existent.
In contrast, there is large scale controlled research at the elementary school level that shows that compensatory education can be provided to low-SES schools and raise their perfromance from the 20th percentile to about the 50th percentile.
Thus, at best, the current evidence says to put into effect the compensatory education that has ben research validated and to provide further research into controlled large-scale studies on improving SES effects and their effect on student achievement. - June 18, 2008 at 5:43 PM
- Corey Bunje Bower said...
Wow -- a lot of comments. Before I get to any of the others, let me address the one that Ken just left.
Whether it's more effective to raise SES or improve schools is an entirely different (though related) subject. If I didn't believe it was possible to raise achievement by improving schools, then I wouldn't be studying ed policy.
Right now I'm talking about which influences current achievement levels more -- home or school. - June 18, 2008 at 7:50 PM
- Roger Sweeny said...
Until we are able to have the same luxuries as private schools and charters school of holding students accountable for their actions, we may not be able to reach (or teach) some of our most difficult students.
That is perhaps the saddest sentence I have ever read about public schools. Far from being a luxury, "holding students repsonsible" is a requirement for a successful school. If a school can't or won't hold students responsible, it is pretty much guaranteeing that many of them--and their peers who have to put up with them--won't get much of an education.
Unfortunately, "holding students responsible" may mean removing them from regular classes. Most public schools refuse to consider alternative kinds of classes for these kids. Big mistake. - June 18, 2008 at 9:41 PM
- Roger Sweeny said...
Can Ken and Corey agree on the following?
"[Poor] kids are different from middle-class kids. They need better instruction and a more structured and carefully managed classroom than middle-class kids. They need compensatory education and they aren't getting it."
By the time they get to middle school, they have had five or six years of inappropriate schooling. This has contributed to their developing a bad attitude toward school and learning, and is a major reason they don't have the skills to succeed in middle school. - June 18, 2008 at 9:59 PM
- RDT said...
What is disputed (and which has not yet been established) is the notion that improving the SES of low-SES students will lead to an increase in their achievement.
I think this overstates the position. There are a lot of things that correlate with low-SES (poor healthcare, low levels of parent education, scarity of informal educational opportunities outside of school and in the pre-school years). Some of these are almost certainly not only correlated with low achievement in school, but causally related to low achievement.
The question seems to me to be: can school effectively overcome the deficits that have a variety of causes. And -- even if the answer is "yes" -- are the other, more cost effective approaches that should be considered in addition to focusing on schooling.
My husband has been known to argue that the most effective way to raise student achievement would be to send all the parents to grad school -- joking, obviously. But I think it bears thinking about whether pre-school programs that actively promoted parental involvement might not be a more cost effective approach than insisting that schools figure out how to make up for the deficits some kids have by the time they start kindergarten. - June 19, 2008 at 2:38 AM
- KDeRosa said...
Some of these are almost certainly not only correlated with low achievement in school, but causally related to low achievement.
The research suggests otherwise. We have quite a few adopted twin studies in which a low-SES twin was adopted by a high-SES family. By adolescence student achievement and IQ were not been raised to what the high-ses predicted. Instead, they were at the adoptee's biological parents' SES level and IQ.
There was some small temporary improvement in academic achievement while the children were young, but the adopted kids did not rise to the level of the biological children in the adopted family as the ses correlation would have predicted.
In any event, this was an extreme intevention whose effects cannot be replicated by a governmental program like those suggested by Broader Bolder.
And -- even if the answer is "yes" -- are the other, more cost effective approaches that should be considered in addition to focusing on schooling.
Are there? I believe the research is lacking for this proposition. You should be calling for more research not for imposing yet another untested welfare-esque social program with unknown efficacy.
But I think it bears thinking about whether pre-school programs that actively promoted parental involvement might not be a more cost effective approach than insisting that schools figure out how to make up for the deficits some kids have by the time they start kindergarten.
This ignores a few practical problems. Teaching young pre-school children in groups is very difficult, more difficult than teaching them in K. Promoting parental involvment for parentals who are eitherunwilling or incapable of providing it isn't going to help much. - June 19, 2008 at 8:53 AM
- Corey Bunje Bower said...
Roger: I would more or less agree with Ken's statement that you quoted.
Ken: Can you send along some of these twin studies? I haven't read them. - June 19, 2008 at 11:06 AM
- Corey Bunje Bower said...
This comes from Deborah Meier:
I think where we may disagree is the assumption that sneaks through in your stories of "blame". The children of the rich have an equal
share, if not more, careless parents who don't spend a lot of energy on their kids real needs, or have a thoughtful relationship with them. But it has less of an impact on school success. In part they have the advantage of passed on advantages that parents can pay for or which come along with wealth. In part they have the HUGE advantage of taking it for granted that they are entitled, that what they do and think matters, that their wishes could become realities--based on
repeated experience. Finally, their families have networks, etc. But then schools also compound these advantages in many ways, including their failure to take advantage of the strengths that poor kids come
with, and the assumptions we approach their "weaknesses"
with--including their different vocabularies, experiences. styles,
interests. All these also make parents of the poor more leery of
schooling, builds walls between honest and respectful conversation
between home and school, etc - so that kids feel more estranged from
the school's culture. etc etc
We can, in short, do better. It may or may not show up on getting the right answer on multiple-choice tests. It might show up on more well-designed assessment tools. But it cannot (statistically)overcome all the other odds. Having an advantage is an advantage. Why else do we want advantages? - June 19, 2008 at 11:42 AM
I think that both Corey and Ken have valid points, although I'm inclined to agree more with Corey since I've had similar teaching experiences to his experiences in the Bronx.
Corey's point is that families and communities have huge impacts on student performance, outside the impact of the school itself. I think this point is basically unassailable: Does anyone believe that parental support, family resources, and commuity values do NOT impact academic performance?
On the other hand, Ken's point is that the right school environment, teaching strategies, and other school characteristics CAN help low-income students increase their academic performance. I find no fault with this assumption, either.
However, Ken's theory does not negate the fact that families have a huge impact on their children's school performance. And it does not negate the fact that schools must work twice as hard to achieve gains for at-risk students, often taking on the role of parent as well as educator.
As some other posters noted, even the best schools and teachers cannot always overcome the problems that students bring with them to school - and they shouldn't be blamed by society when they don't. - June 19, 2008 at 12:17 PM
To compare teaching to other professions... Employers aren't blamed by society when a worker quits; Doctors aren't blamed by society when not all of their patients are cured; and Generals are not blamed by society when every soldier does not survive an armed conflict.
Teachers, likewise, should not be blamed by society when less than 100% of their students achieve top academic success. Schools must work with the students they are given, and many of the students come with emotional baggage and other problems.
All we can ask of schools is that they try their best, with the resources they are given. - June 19, 2008 at 12:25 PM
- KDeRosa said...
Corey are are some links:
The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study
The Minnesota Twin Family Study and Brouchard's Reanalysis
The Minnesota Texas Adoption Research Project and Willerman's various papers. - June 19, 2008 at 1:46 PM
- KDeRosa said...
Unfortunately, teaching is not a profession. There is no professional responsibility for bad teaching. Teachers cannot be sued for educational malpractice like other professionals.
The result is that the "teacher's best" does not have to reach the established norms of teaching. In fact, the lack of professional responsibility permits teachers to ignore all the research they don't like, so norms haven't even developed yet. The educational equivalent of bleeding and leaching is still permitted in education. - June 19, 2008 at 2:58 PM
- RDT said...
KDeRosa writes:
We have quite a few adopted twin studies in which a low-SES twin was adopted by a high-SES family. By adolescence student achievement and IQ were not been raised to what the high-ses predicted. Instead, they were at the adoptee's biological parents' SES level and IQ.
So you're arguing that schools should be able to erase achievement deficits of low SES kids, even though adoptive families aren't able to??? - June 19, 2008 at 9:11 PM
- KDeRosa said...
Yes, that's exactly what I'm arguing. Here's the math for low SES kids.
poor family + bad school = lower achievement
rich family + bad school = slightly less low achievement
poor family + good school = higher achievement
rich family + good school = slightly higher achievement
Under NCLB eliminating the achievement gap doesn't mean that all children will perform equally. I can explain that too if you want me to. - June 19, 2008 at 10:06 PM
- RDT said...
KDeRosa writes:
Here's the math for low SES kids.
Can you point us toward data that backs up this math? - June 19, 2008 at 10:53 PM
- KDeRosa said...
I've provided the links above to the adoption studies in which low-ses infants were placed with high-SES families; student achievement did not improve like the ses/achievement correlation supposedly predicts.
Then there's project follow through and 25 years of confirmatory subsequent research showing that by improving the instruction and classroom management in low-SES schools, student achievement can be improved to middle-class levels. - June 20, 2008 at 8:18 AM
Ken: Regarding the adoption studies... If low-SES children were placed with high-SES families by age 7, wouldn't we presume that the low-SES children therefore went on to attend "good" schools? If low-SES children who attended good schools did not improve their achievement levels, I don't understand your argument that poor kids attending good schools will create good academic outcomes.
Is your theory that the low-SES kids who were adopted by high-SES families then "became" high-SES by virtue of adoption?
My understanding of the adoption studies is that they show that genetics, early childhood, or pre-natal factors had a large effect on children ... so large that it couldn't be overcome by adoption into middle class families. Alternatively, because the adopted children were black or multi-racial, perhaps the study seems to show that the effect of societal prejudice against the adopted children based on their race was a deleterious force in their academic achievement.
How do you interpret the adoption studies? - June 20, 2008 at 8:43 AM
- KDeRosa said...
No, I would not presume that schools serving primarily high-SES populations schools are any more effective with low-SES kids than low-SES schools. The data doesn't really support such a conclusion. See here and follow the links.
Is your theory that the low-SES kids who were adopted by high-SES families then "became" high-SES by virtue of adoption?
The adoption served as a massive environmental intervention. The adopted children grew up in a high-SES environment, sometimes from birth (as in the Colorado Adoption Project). No, the adopted children did not become high-SES (because SES has a genetic component), but their environment was changed to high-SES (to a much greater extent than anything that can be accomplished via a governemental intervention, such as Broader Bolder).
My understanding of the adoption studies is that they show that genetics, early childhood, or pre-natal factors had a large effect on children ... so large that it couldn't be overcome by adoption into middle class families.
The studies all has similar outcomes. Some of the studies had adoptions from birth or very shortly thereafter. The level of pre-natal care among the low-SES parents in the US does not cause depressed IQ.
Alternatively, because the adopted children were black or multi-racial, perhaps the study seems to show that the effect of societal prejudice against the adopted children based on their race was a deleterious force in their academic achievement.
Not all the adopted children were black, some were white, and they showed the same biological parent similarities. - June 20, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Ken: Thanks for your response to my questions. Interesting issues at play...
- June 20, 2008 at 12:07 PM
One more comment: Your point seems to be that low SES kids have problems that need to be addressed by specific educational strategies geared to low SES kids. That is, the the schools with primarily high SES kids are not necessarily going to be places where low SES kids thrive ("No, I would not presume that schools serving primarily high-SES populations schools are any more effective with low-SES kids than low-SES schools.').
Comes back to the points both you and Corey make: Educational interventions are possible with low SES kids, but the path to success is harder and more complex than with the high SES students. - June 20, 2008 at 12:12 PM
I agree with the former argument that a healthy home environment is condusive to a meaningful learning experience at school. While I also do not have empirical data, I have served as a classroom teacher for years and I also serviced students as a truancy social worker. One major issue is that what goes on in school with respect to direct and explicit instruction is not facilliated in the homes. This is ostensible because most parents are not educators. When a student does not study effectively, they do not progress academically. Further, although we as educators profess that schools can handle the social issues that are reflective of the community, we are misguiding ourselves. Society really does not care about an individuals social situation. What matters most to the bureaucracy of education is high-stakes testing. Students have to sink or swim and naturally that is the order of things in education. Overall there needs to be more student and parental initiative in trying to succeed academically.
PHIILADELPHIA, PA - December 11, 2008 at 5:24 PM


text:
People think you can't earn money online. Why the proceedings? Simple answer is that individuals are sceptical about things that happen to be too good to be true. I believe that winning the lottery is great to be true to be true. Hard work like during a million a minimum of one chance you win the lottery for example a ticket. The chances of winning the lottery are harder than driving over poo on the way on easy methods to getting a lottery remedy.
togel hongkong with it is whenever you want to, you may make money referring this business to persons. If you want to do this, you join as a marketing representative. The reason only $25 per thirty days. You don't have to do this if you just want to join the lottery pool for completely. Again, this is such a great benefit. With this pool you a few choices help to make it. I think one of doors benefits until this pool offers are possibilities.
But on the internet that absolutely specifically look for lotto pools on the net that are 100% legit and legal that give BIGGER earnings regardless of your pool measurements.
The last good thing of playing Online lottery may be the you are certain to get free lotto tickets. Lotteries online you do not have the same issues like of those small town lotteries like electricity bills and room maintenance. Prolonged as you as obtain the ticket, you would get free plays.
Start searching for your dream home. If you for you to build it, look for property and plans. Megamillions lottery winner, Cynthia Stafford started house hunting when she had no money in. And she won $112 million. This part of course of action makes your home real you r and revs up the winning electrical.
In Online lottery pick 6 lottery games, 6 balls from 1 to 49 are selected twice a week on Mondays and Thursdays. The jackpot begins at $2 million and increases by $250,000 for each rollover until a player is have all the 6 numbers matched. The probability of actually striking the jackpot is 1 in 13.98 squillion. However, there are smaller prizes for having only 3 numbers paired. Every bet costs only $1.
While betting and not winning still sounds helpful to someone who's only seeking the thrill, actually winning is still so exceptional. If you wish to be one of the not many people who are choosing strategies to outthink the lottery and beat chances on an even basis, anyone might want search for different playing strategies which can be found internet.
Once you might have bought a ticket online, you will be provided a receipt for the same, keep this receipt safely as you will want it fix your vision . of the draw in case you win any prize. Begin using all the above mentioned secrets, require it and it always brighten your associated with winning a lottery game.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Assessment |
Biopsychology |
Comparative |
Cognitive |
Developmental |
Language |
Individual differences |
Personality |
Philosophy |
Social |
Methods |
Statistics |
Clinical |
Educational |
Industrial |
Professional items |
World psychology |
Biological: Behavioural genetics · Evolutionary psychology · Neuroanatomy · Neurochemistry · Neuroendocrinology · Neuroscience · Psychoneuroimmunology · Physiological Psychology · Psychopharmacology (Index, Outline)
For information on the human brain specifically, please see its article.
In animals, the brain, or encephalon (Greek for "in the head"), acts as the control center of the central nervous system. In most animals, the brain is located in the head close to the primary sensory apparatus and the mouth. While all vertebrate nervous systems have a brain, invertebrate nervous systems may have either a centralized brain or collections of individual ganglia. The brain is an extremely complex organ; for example, the human brain is a collection of 100 billion neurons, each linked with up to 25,000 others [1]. This huge number of interconnecting neurons—often referred to as a neural ensemble—is what allows the brain to conduct such complex processes.
The brain controls and coordinates most sensory systems, movement, behavior, and homeostatic body functions such as heart rate, blood pressure, fluid balance, and body temperature. The brain is the source of cognition, emotion, memory, and motor, and other forms of learning. Many behaviors such as simple reflexes and basic locomotion, can be executed under spinal cord control alone.
Most brains exhibit a visible distinction between grey matter and white matter. Grey matter consists of the cell bodies of the neurons, while the white matter consists of the fibers (axons) that connect neurons over long distances. The entire outer visible layers of the brain is called the cortex which consists primarily of grey matter. However, deeper grey matter structures called nuclei also exist throughout the central nervous system. The axons of this white matter are surrounded by a fatty insulating sheath called myelin, giving the white matter its distinctive color.
The study of the brain is known as neuroscience, a field of biology aimed at understanding the functions of the brain at every level, from the molecular up to psychological.
Mind and brain[]
A distinction is sometimes made in the philosophy of mind between the mind and brain. The brain is defined as the physical, biological matter contained within the head, responsible for all electrochemical neuronal processes. The mind, however, exists as something outside of the brain. The mind is sometimes thought of as consciousness, the soul, or some other non-physical center of thought.
The inability to determine what consciousness is has led to the mind-body problem.
Some philosophers such as strong AI theorists believe that the mind is analogous to computer software and the brain to computer hardware.
- Main article: History of the brain
Early views on the function of the brain regarded it as little more than cranial stuffing. In Ancient Egypt, from the late Middle Kingdom onwards, in preparation for mummification, the brain was regularly removed, for it was the heart that was assumed to be the seat of intelligence. According to Herodotus, during the first step of mummification, "The most perfect practice is to extract as much of the brain as possible with an iron hook, and what the hook cannot reach is mixed with drugs." Over the next five-thousand years, this view came to be reversed; the brain is now known to be seat of intelligence, although idiomatic variations of the former remain, as in memorizing something "by heart".[1]
The first thoughts of the field of psychology actually came from ancient philosophers, including Aristotle. As philosophers became more in tune with medical research over time, the idea of psychology emerged. From that point, different branches of psychology emerged with different individuals creating new ideas.
Modern neuroscience[]
Modern neuroscience is experiencing rapid growth due to the availability of computers capable of handling the intense processing required for understanding such a complex system. Neuroscientists use a variety of approaches to study the brain at different levels—from the molecules to systems. Extensive knowledge has been accumulated about the electrophysiological properties of different types of neurons and their responsiveness to neurotransmitters. Recordings from the brains of awake, behaving animals pioneered by Edward Evarts help to decode neuronal firing during different behaviors and cognitive processes. Miguel Nicolelis introduced multielectrode recording techniques which led to creation of rudimentary brain-computer interfaces. Rapidly developing neuroimaging techniques such as allows scientists to study the brain in living humans and animals in ways that their predecessors could not.
Comparative anatomy[]
- Main article: Comparative anatomy of the brain
(See related article at List of regions in the human brain)
According to the hierarchy based on embryonic and evolutionary development, chordate brains are composed of the three regions that later develop into five total divisions:
- Rhombencephalon (hindbrain)
- Myelencephalon
- Metencephalon
- Mesencephalon (midbrain)
- Prosencephalon (forebrain)
- Diencephalon
- Telencephalon
The brain can also be classified according to function, including divisions such as:
- Limbic system
- Sensory systems
- Visual system
- Olfactory system
- Gustatory system
- Auditory system
- Somatosensory system
- Motor system
- Associative areas
- Main article: human brain
The structure of the human brain is different from that of other animals in several significant ways. These differences have allowed for many abilities over and above those of other animals, such as advanced cognitive skills. Human encephalization is especially pronounced in the neocortex, the most complex part of the cerebral cortex. The proportion of the human brain that is devoted to the neocortex—especially to the prefrontal cortex—is larger than in all other animals.
Humans enjoy unique neural capacities, but much of the human brain structure is shared with ancient species. Basic systems that alert the nervous system to stimulus, that sense events in the environment, and monitor the condition of the body are similar to those of the most basic vertebrates. The neural circuitry underlying human consciousness includes both the advanced neocortex and prototypical structures of the brain stem. The human brain also has a massive number of synaptic connections allowing for a great deal of parallel processing.
Despite the variance of the species in which the brain is found there are many common features in its cellular make-up, its structure, and its function. On a cellular level the brain is composed of two classes of cells, neurons and glia, both of which contain several different cell types which perform different functions. Interconnected neurons form neural networks (or neural ensembles). These networks are similar to man-made electrical circuits in that they contain circuit elements (neurons) connected by biological wires (nerve fibers). These do not form simple one-to-one electrical circuits like many man-made circuits, however. Typically neurons connect to at least a thousand other neurons [2]. These highly specialized circuits make up systems which are the basis of perception, action, and higher cognitive function.
Neurons are the cells that generate action potentials and convey information to other cells; these constitute the essential class of brain cells. In each particular brain area, input (or afferent) neurons, output (or efferent) neurons, and interneurons are typically found. Input neurons are recipients of projections from other brain areas. Output neurons project to the other areas. Interneurons are the neurons which do not leave the area but rather perform local processing.
In addition to neurons, the brain contains glial cells in a roughly 10:1 proportion to neurons. Glial cells (Greek: "glue") perform supportive roles to neurons including creating the insulating myelin, providing structure to the neuronal network, waste management, and neurotransmitter clean up. Most types of glia in the brain (and the rest of the central nervous system) are present in the entire nervous system. Exceptions include oligodendrocytes which insulate neural axons (a role performed by Schwann cells in the peripheral nervous system). Oligosaccharides are the defining factor between white matter and grey matter in the brain—white matter is composed of myelinated axons, whereas grey matter contains mostly cell soma, dendrites, and unmyelinated portions of axons and glia. The space between neurons is filled with dendrites as well as unmyelinated segments of axons; this area is referred to as the neuropil.
In mammals, the brain also contains connective tissue called the meninges, a system of membranes that separate the skull from the brain. This three-layered covering is made of, from the outside in, dura mater, arachnoid mater, and pia mater. The arachnoid and pia are physically connected and thus often considered as a single layer, the pia-arachnoid. Below the arachnoid is the subarachnoid space which contains cerebrospinal fluid, a substance that protects the nervous system. Blood vessels enter the central nervous system through the perivascular space above the pia mater. A blood-brain barrier protects the brain from toxins that might enter through the blood.
The brain is suspended in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), which circulates between layers of the meninges and through cavities in the brain called ventricles. It is important both chemically for metabolism and mechanically for shock-prevention. For example, the human brain weighs about 1-1.5 kilograms. The mass and density of the brain are such that it will begin to collapse under its own weight. The CSF allows the brain to float, easing the stress caused by the brain's mass.
Vertebrate brains receive signals through nerves arriving from the sensors of the organism. These signals are then interpreted throughout the central nervous system reactions are formulated based upon reflex and learned experiences. A similarly extensive nerve network delivers signals from a brain to control muscles throughout the body. Anatomically, the majority of afferent and efferent nerves (with the exception of the cranial nerves) are connected to the spinal cord, which then transfers the signals to and from the brain.
Sensory input is processed by the brain to recognize danger, find food, identify potential mates, and perform more sophisticated functions. Visual, touch, and auditory sensory pathways of vertebrates are routed to specific nuclei of the thalamus and then to regions of the cerebral cortex that are specific to each sensory system. The visual system, the auditory system, and the somatosensory system. Olfactory pathways are routed to the olfactory bulb, then to various parts of the olfactory system. Taste is routed through the brainstem and then to other portions of the gustatory system.
To control movement the brain has several parallel systems of muscle control. The motor system controls voluntary muscle movement, aided by the motor cortex, cerebellum, and the basal ganglia. The system eventually projects to the spinal cord and then out to the muscle effectors. Nuclei in the brain stem control many involuntary muscle functions such as heart rate and breathing. In addition, many automatic acts (simple reflexes, locomotion) can be controlled by the spinal cord alone.
Brains also produce a portion of the body's hormones that can influence organs and glands elsewhere in a body—conversely, brains also react to hormones produced elsewhere in the body. In mammals, most of these hormones are released into the circulatory system by a structure called the pituitary gland.
It is hypothesized that developed brains derive consciousness from the complex interactions between the numerous systems within the brain. Cognitive processing in mammals occurs in the cerebral cortex but relies on midbrain and limbic functions as well. Among "younger" (in an evolutionary sense) vertebrates, advanced processing involves progressively rostral (forward) regions of the brain.
Hormones, incoming sensory information, and cognitive processing performed by the brain determine the brain state. Stimulus from any source can trigger a general arousal process that focuses cortical operations to processing of the new information. This focusing of cognition is known as attention. Cognitive priorities are constantly shifted by a variety of factors such as hunger, fatigue, belief, unfamiliar information, or threat. The simplest dichotomy related to the processing of threats is the fight-or-flight response mediated by the amygdala and other limbic structures.
Brain pathology[]
Clinically, death is defined as an absence of brain activity as measured by EEG. Injuries to the brain tend to affect large areas of the organ, sometimes causing major deficits in intelligence, memory, and movement. Head trauma caused, for example, by vehicle and industrial accidents, is a leading cause of death in youth and middle age. In many cases, more damage is caused by resultant swelling (edema) than by the impact itself. Stroke, caused by the blockage or rupturing of blood vessels in the brain, is another major cause of death from brain damage.
Other problems in the brain can be more accurately classified as diseases rather than injuries. Neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, motor neurone disease, and Huntington's disease are caused by the gradual death of individual neurons, leading to decrements in movement control, memory, and cognition. Currently only the symptoms of these diseases can be treated. Mental illnesses, such as clinical depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder are brain diseases that impact the personality and typically on other aspects of mental and somatic function. These disorders may be treated by psychiatric therapy, pharmaceutical intervention, or through a combination of treatments; therapeutic effectiveness varies significantly among individuals.
Some infectious diseases affecting the brain are caused by viral and bacterial infection(s). Infection of the meninges, the membrane that covers the brain, can lead to meningitis. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (also known as mad cow disease), is deadly in cattle and is linked to prions. Kuru is a similar prion-borne degenerative brain disease affecting humans. Both are linked to the ingestion of neural tissue, and may be an evolutionary defense against cannibalism. Viral or bacterial causes have been substantiated in multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Lyme disease, encephalopathy, and encephalomyelitis.
Some brain disorders are congenital. Tay-Sachs disease, Fragile X syndrome, Down syndrome, and Tourette syndrome are all linked to genetic and chromosomal errors. Malfunctions in the embryonic development of the brain can be caused by genetic factors, by drug use, and disease during a mother's pregnancy.
The study of the brain[]
Fields of study[]
Several areas of science specifically study the brain. Neuroscience seeks to understand the nervous system, including the brain, from a biological and computational perspective. Psychology seeks to understand behavior and the brain. The terms neurology and psychiatry usually refer to medical applications of neuroscience and psychology respectively. Cognitive science seeks to unify neuroscience and psychology with other fields that concern themselves with the brain, such as computer science (artificial intelligence and similar fields) and philosophy.
Methods of observation[]
- Main article: neuroimaging
Each method for observing activity in the brain has its advantages and drawbacks. Electrophysiology, in which wire electrodes are implanted in the brain, allows scientists to record the electrical activity of individual neurons or fields of neurons. However this method requires invasive surgery and thus this technique is typically usually used only with lab animals or during neurosurgery.
By placing electrodes on the scalp one can record the summed electrical activity of the cortex in a technique known as EEG. EEG measures the mass changes in electrical current from the cerebral cortex, but can only detect changes over large areas of the brain with very little sub-cortical activity.
fMRI and PET[]
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) measures changes in blood flow in the brain, but the activity of neurons is not directly measured, nor can it be distinguished whether this activity is inhibitory or excitatory. Similarly, a positron emission tomography (PET), is able to monitor glucose metabolism in different areas within the brain which can be correlated to the level of activity in that region.
Behavioral tests can measure symptoms of disease and mental performance, but can only provide indirect measurements of brain function and may not be practical in all animals. In humans however, a neurological exam can be done to determine the location of any trauma, lesion, or tumor within the brain, brain stem, or spinal cord.
Autopsy analysis of the brain allows for the study of anatomy and protein expression patterns, but is only possible after the human or animal is dead. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to study the anatomy of a living creature and is widely used in both research and medicine.
Other methods[]
Attempts have also been made to directly "read" the brain, which has been accomplished in a rudimentary manner through a brain-computer interface. Brain activity can be detected by implanted electrodes, raising the possibility of direct mind-computer interface. The reverse method has been successfully demonstrated: brain implants have been used to generate artificial hearing and (crude and experimental) artificial vision for deaf and blind people. Brain pacemakers are now commonly used to regulate brain activity in conditions such as Parkinson's disease.
Other matters[]
Computer scientists have produced simulated neural networks loosely based on the structure of neuron connections in the brain. Artificial intelligence seeks to replicate brain function—although not necessarily brain mechanisms—but as yet has been met with limited success.
Creating algorithms to mimic a biological brain is extremely difficult because the brain is not a static arrangement of circuits, but rather a network of vastly interconnected neurons that are constantly changing their connectivity and sensitivity. More recent work in both neuroscience and artificial intelligence models the brain using the mathematical tools of chaos theory and dynamical systems. Current research has also focused on recreating the neural structure of the brain with the aim of producing human-like cognition and artificial intelligence.
Brain energy consumption[]
The neurons of the brain require a lot of energy. Although the brain represents only 2% of the body weight, it receives 15% of the cardiac output, 20% of total body oxygen consumption, and 25% of total body glucose utilization. The energy consumption for the brain to simply survive is 0.1 calories per minute, while this value can be as high as 1.5 calories per minute during crossword puzzle-solving.[3] The demands of the brain limit its size in many species. Molossid bats and the Vespertilionid Nyctalus spp. have brains that have been reduced from the ancestral form to invest in wing-size for the sake of manoeuverability. This contrasts with fruit bats, which require more advanced neural structures and do not pursue their prey.[4]
See also[]
- A/S ratio
- Blood brain barrier
- Brain damage
- Brain development timelines
- Brain-computer interface
- Brain disorders
- Brain lesions
- Brain mapping
- Brain neoplasms
- Brain self stimulation
- Brain size
- Brain stimulation
- Brain to body mass ratio
- Brain weight
- Cerebral atrophy
- Cerebral dominance
- Central nervous system
- Cerebrospinal fluid
- Human brain
- Lateral dominance
- Left brain
- List of regions in the human brain
- Nervous system
- Neurology
- Neuroscience
- Traumatic brain injury
Further reading[]
- Junqueira, L.C., and J. Carneiro (2003). Basic Histology: Text and Atlas, Tenth Edition, Lange Medical Books McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0071215654.
- Sala, Sergio Della, editor. (1999). Mind myths: Exploring popular assumptions about the mind and brain, J. Wiley & Sons, New York. ISBN 0471983039.
- Vander, A., J. Sherman, D. Luciano (2001). Human Physiology: The Mechanisms of Body Function, McGraw Hill Higher Education. ISBN 0071180885.
- ↑ Hendrickson, Robert (April 2000). The Facts on File Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins, New York: Facts on File. "The ancient Greeks believed that the heart, the most noticeable internal organ, was the seat of intelligence and memory as well as emotion. This belief was passed on down the ages and became the basis for the English expression 'learn by heart,' which is used by Chaucer (1374) and must have been proverbial long before that. 'To record' reminds us again of this ancient belief in the heart as the seat of the mind. When writing wasn't a simple act, things had to be memorized; thus we have the word 'record,' formed from the Latin 're,' 'again,' and 'cor,' 'heart,' which means exactly the same as 'learn by heart.'"
- ↑ Statistic from page 161 of Basic Histology: Text and Atlas, 10th ed. by L.C. Junqueira, and J. Carneiro.
- ↑ Calderone, Melissa A. (2006). Mental Workout: Do you use more energy when you're thinking really hard?. URL accessed on 2007-06-03.
- ↑ Safi, K., M.A. Seid & D.K.N. Dechmann. (2005) "Bigger is not always better: when brains get smaller." Biol. Lett. 1(3): 283-6.
External links[]
- Brain Tutorial
- Comparative Mammalian Brain Collection
- RMCybernetics - The Brain and Artificial Intelligence
- BrainInfo for Neuroanatomy
- Neuroscience for kids
- Brain Medical Clip Art.
- neuroscience wiki
- BrainMaps.org, interactive high-resolution digital brain atlas based on scanned images of serial sections of both primate and non-primate brains
This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors). |


text:
When You're Asked About Cults
When You're Asked About Cults
From Easily Fooled, copyright © 2000 by Robert Fellows <www.robertfellows.com>
The two questions that I am asked most often about cults are "How can you tell if a group is a cult?" and "What can I do if I know someone who is in a cult?"
In asking the first question, people usually mean "How can I tell if a group is destructive?" A group can be deviant or heretical in its beliefs without being destructive. A group can also be destructive without holding particularly unusual beliefs.
Psychologist Michael Langone has defined a destructive group as one that employs any or all of the following tactics:
1. Manipulation and deception.
This technique is seen especially in recruiting new members. For example, someone has a "business proposition" for you, but they won't tell you exactly what it is until you come to a meeting. Then it turns out to be a familiar direct sales scheme. Or a group says it's not a religion when recruiting new members, but claims to be a religion at tax time.
2. Exclusivity.
The group claims or implies that it has the only right answer to a specific question or problem. An example might be an anti-war group that will not appear on a panel with other anti-war groups, but only do a presentation by themselves because the other groups "do not have the right solution to the problem."
3. Psychological or financial exploitation.
Some indications of this manipulation are that the member is spending a lot of money on the group, borrowing money, or donating a lot of volunteer time to the exclusion of other pursuits.
4. Totalitarianism.
The members are expected to think, feel, and act in a manner prescribed by the group—all the time.
5. Psychological damage to the member or to his or her family.
This is seen especially with groups that try to separate members from their families, either physically or emotionally.
A group can be destructive without claiming to be a religion or to offer a new self-improvement method. Rather than attempting to determine if a group is a "cult," I try to get people to see how any group or even a relationship between two people can be destructive to personal freedom if it is manipulative.
Before attempting to follow any of these suggestions, it is most important to do an assessment of the presenting situation. Get the help of someone who is qualified, and determine what the underlying problem really is, and how it may or may not be a case of cultic manipulation. If it is appropriate to your situation, then the techniques for communicating with those who are involved in manipulative groups or who have undergone a sudden personality change consist primarily of 1) active listening and 2) creating an environment in which change can occur.
It is most important to keep lines of communication open. If you are the member's friend or family member, leave the door open for him or her to come back at all times. Use active listening and remain calm. Make sure the member knows that you are really listening.
Make "I statements" about your position and feelings. You can say "I am uncomfortable about this group," but avoid arguing the group's philosophy. The member will have plenty of ammunition to combat such arguments. Generally it is adviseable to avoid ultimatums, orders, force, punishment, or rewards for leaving the group. Don't try to buy the member's mind.
Communication with family and former friends is important for reintegration into life away from the group. Talk about the member's past, former relationships, and life before the radical change. Maintain communication with others in the member's life as you counsel him or her.
Keep arguments about the beliefs of the group to an absolute minimum. This is especially difficult to do. Avoid polarization, name-calling, and even the use of the word "cult." Remember: deviant or heretical views by your standards are not necessarily destructive. Try not to deny others' desires for spiritual meaning. Remain open-minded and avoid rigid positions. Instead, focus on the restriction of free choice due to manipulation and deception.
Learn about the group in question so that when absolutely necessary you can discuss it intelligently with the member. To learn about the groups beliefs, you can read the group's own literature. As you do so, stay in conversation with an expert on cultism. You do not want to be influenced by the group yourself! To learn about the group's activities, you can contact the International Cultic Studies Association, PO Box 2265, Bonita Springs FL 34133. You may be able to purchase collections of published articles about specific groups that you question.
If you seek a therapist, choose one who is experienced in cult counseling. Be aware that victimization by cultic manipulation is different from mental illness. Avoid therapists who use coercive deprogramming techniques or who employ psychologically dangerous models of therapy. If you consult with lawyers, make sure they are familiar with cult-related litigation.
Limit your personal involvement with the destructive group. Don't underestimate its ability to convert you. It is usually best not to lend or give the member any money. This will be difficult for close friends and family members, just as it will be difficult to make clear "I" statements about your discomfort.
It seems to be most effective to take a moderate position, focusing primarily on manipulation and deception in destructive groups, rather than on the perceived irrationality of their belief systems.


text:
SEATTLE – October 8, 2019 – WatchGuard® Technologies, a global leader in network security and intelligence, secure Wi-Fi and multi-factor authentication, today announced the release of the Firebox T35-R. This industrially hardened, network security appliance allows midmarket businesses, distributed enterprises, and the managed service providers that support them, to extend WatchGuard's industry-leading security services and performance beyond traditional office and data center settings to protect against malware, intrusions and other threats in the industry's harshest environments.
"As cyber criminals set their sights on the massive wave of newly adopted and potentially insecure industrial internet of things (IIoT) devices, businesses need network security solutions that can withstand the unforgiving deployment conditions present in harsh environments," said Brendan Patterson, VP of product management at WatchGuard. "The T35-R is designed to meet this growing demand, offering the same industry-leading, enterprise-grade performance and security protections as our conventional network security appliances, with added resistance to temperature, moisture and dust concerns often found in manufacturing, oil and gas plants, utilities sites, agricultural environments and other rugged locations."
The Firebox T35-R offers the best combination of performance, ruggedization and price on the market today. Key features that make it the perfect solution for rugged environments include:
- An IP64-Rated Industrial Enclosure – The appliance is fully dust- and splash-proof, and capable of operating in temperatures of -40 to +60 degrees Celsius, providing reliable security and connectivity that persists despite the extreme conditions often found in nontraditional network environments, and eliminating the need to build custom enclosures.
- DC Power – The appliance can operate on 12v to 48v DC power, or alternatively use an optional AC power supply.
- Industry-leading Network Security –The T35-R makes site-to-site VPN connectivity simple, reliable and manageable, and empowers administrators to confidently enable advanced security protections including APT Blocker, Threat Detection and Response, DNSWatch, IPS, Gateway AntiVirus, and more, without slowing network speeds. NSS Labs recently recommended WatchGuard Firebox in their annual NGFW report as one of only two vendors that successfully defeated all evasion attempts.
- Simplified Deployment – Industrial organizations and the IT solution providers that support them can easily configure, deploy and manage the T35-R using RapidDeploy, WatchGuard's centralized zero-touch configuration solution, and the WatchGuard Cloud management platform. Users can pre-configure appliances for quick and nontechnical installation, saving travel time and man hours for individual security deployments at remote industrial sites.
- SCADA IPS Signatures – Included with WatchGuard's Basic and Total Security Suite, the Firebox T35-R leverages these signatures to protect against known industrial control system (ICS) and SCADA threats and enable security use cases in harsh deployment environments.


text:
More by Beth
More Health
More Nutrition
CBN News Health and Science
The 700 Club's Skinny Wednesday Resource Page
CBN.com Bacteria for breakfast – it's the newest health kick. More and more people are trying probiotic-infused dairy products, each spoonful teeming with microscopic critters that promise to contribute to good health.
Probiotics are living, single-celled microbes that provide a health benefit when taken in adequate amounts. These "friendly bacteria" are added to foods during processing or put into capsules or powders that are sold as supplements. Dairy products like yogurt, kefir, and buttermilk are the most common probiotic-enhanced foods, but others are flooding the market such as infant formula, juice, cereal, and even candy bars. Other foods that ordinarily contain probiotics include cottage cheese, tempeh, miso, soy sauce, and fresh sauerkraut.
Television commercials advertise newfangled yogurts and smoothies with probiotics that promote "regularity," making them seem like modern health foods. On the contrary, cultured milk products have a long history of promoting health.
Historians believe dairy products like kefir and yogurt were consumed by God's people throughout Bible times. More recently, a 19th century Russian immunologist linked the long, healthy lives of Bulgarian peasants to their intake of fermented milk.
No. Prebiotics are dietary substances that serve as food for the probiotic bacteria. Common prebiotics include inulin, oligofructose, and lactulose. Prebiotics are found naturally in foods like onions, garlic, oatmeal, honey, wheat, barley, legumes, bananas, berries, leafy greens, and leeks. Some probiotic-infused dairy products have prebiotics added to help the friendly microbes survive in the intestinal tract. Added prebiotics should be listed on the ingredients label.
Probiotics have hard-to-pronounce scientific names. The most common ones are Lactobaccillus and Bifidobacterium. A type of bacteria called Streptococcus thermophilus is often used as a yogurt starter culture. Each type of probiotic bacteria is identified by three names: genus, species, and strain. Here is an example: Bifidobacterium infantis 35624. Genus and species are in italics and the number designates the strain. On food labels the genus is sometimes abbreviated with just a capital letter like this: B. infantis 35624.
The main reason to use probiotics is because they increase the "good bacteria" in the gut. These microbes, trillions of them in the small and large intestines, play key roles in digestion and immune function. Sometimes the normal gut bacteria, also called intestinal flora, are disrupted by antibiotics or illness. A number of the good flora may be wiped out and "bad" bacterial overgrowth may result, causing diarrhea and other gastrointestinal miseries. Adding back some good bacteria via probiotics helps normalize bacterial colonization. That's why doctors recommend eating yogurt with antibiotics.
The intestines are vital to the immune system because more than half of the body's immune cells are in the intestinal walls. Bringing balance to the gut flora helps maximize immune function.
Numerous claims are made on behalf of probiotics, but many of the so-called health benefits are not yet substantiated by research in human subjects. According to the World Gastroenterology Organisation (the correct European spelling), there is adequate evidence to utilize probiotics for:
Definitely not. There are a couple of things to keep in mind about how probiotics work. First, they may not work the same for everyone. Each person has a distinctive pattern of bacterial flora in his or her intestines, so a certain probiotic may not have the same benefit for you as it will for someone else. Some people who try probiotic supplements get positive effects in as little as a week or two. For others, it may take a month or two to see results. Second, the benefits of probiotics are strain-specific. If a study shows that one strain of probiotic bacteria prevents infections, it does not mean that all probiotics prevent infections. One strain may help with allergies while another may treat diarrhea. For example, the strain L. acidophilus LA-5 may have different effects than the strain L. acidophilus NCFM.
Most food sources of probiotics, like yogurt, kefir, and cereal, are probably safe for most healthy people. A doctor should be consulted before giving probiotics to young children, the elderly, and anyone with a medical condition or compromised immune function. Researchers have already identified one medical condition where probiotics can do more harm than good: in a study of patients with acute pancreatitis, using probiotics doubled their risk of dying.
At this point, no general recommendations can be made for how much to take or eat. Most human studies used daily dosing of probiotics, whether in food or supplement form. Studies showed effective doses between 100 million and one billion colony forming units (CFUs). Dose depends on which strain is used and what health benefit is desired. Anyone who is considering taking a probiotic supplement, should consult a physician for dosage recommendations.
Existing labels on some probiotic-infused dairy products give very little information. Ideally, the label would tell you the genus, species, and strain of each probiotic in the food. It would also cite human studies conducted on that particular product or strain. There should also be a date indicating how long the probiotic is effective and assurance that the bacteria will survive until that date. If probiotics continue their surge in popularity, manufacturers may be required to make the labels more consumer-friendly.
Our knowledge of probiotics is in its infancy. There is much to discover about how added bacteria interact with normal intestinal flora. Perhaps future studies will demonstrate more ways probiotics can promote good health. For now, eating a cup of low-fat yogurt with live active cultures and probiotics is probably a wise move for most healthy people. At the very least, you get protein, calcium, vitamin D, and other nutrients along with the friendly critters. Bacteria for breakfast – why not?
SOURCES: Douglas, Linda C., PhD, RD and Mary E. Sanders, PhD. "Probioitics and Prebiotics in Dietetics Practice. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, March 2008, Vol. 108, No. 3; 511-520.
Guarner, Francisco, et.al. "Probiotics and prebiotics." World Gastroenterology Organisation Practice Guidelines. World Gastroenterology Organisation, May 2008. www.worldgastroenterology.org/assets/downloads/en/pdf/guidelines/19_probiotics_prebiotics.pdf Accessed 10/28/08.
Palmer, Sharon, RD. "Happy Entrails: A Close Look at Digestive health Claims." Today's Dietitian, May 2008; 29-32.
"Probiotics and Prebiotics." RD411 Web site. www.rd411.com/article_printer.php?ID=465 Accessed 9/24/08.
Sanders, MaryEllen, PhD. "Quick Reference Guide to Probiotics." September 2008. www.usprobiotics.org/docs/probiotic%20handout%20clinician%20with%20references.pdf Accessed 10/28/08.
"Understanding Probiotics." RD411 Web site. www.rd411.com/article_printer.php?ID=246 Accessed 6/4/08.
Beth Bence Reinke is a registered dietitian who writes about food, nutrition, and health topics. She is a mom of two sons and the author of numerous magazine articles for adults and children. Beth and her husband have been CBN partners since 1998. Visit her at www.bethbencereinke.com .
A caring friend will be there to pray with you in your time of need.