I suggest before anyone writes off flying b/c of an inability to bring water on a plane that you talk with some people who have recently flown.

I flew (from Europe) two days after the latest security alert. There were bottles of water waiting in the seat pocket.

On the first domestic leg, the crew took everyone's order while we were taxying out. Once we hit the 10,000 (?) mark, the carts were out in the aisle--for a one and-a-half hour flight.

On the second leg, we were held at takeoff for 15 minutes. The captain came on and encouraged us to use our cell phones, etc. The lone flight attendant encouraged us to use the bathroom and came around with bottled water.

I can't imagine this is just Delta. It's summer; it's hot. They need to hydrate people.

After reading this article, I'm unclear about what exactly is being measured and how it is indicative of students' learning. Rockwell reports that the study looked at "the achievement" of students as a measure for success. What was that acheivement? Grades? Test scores? Playing well with others? I'm sure anyone who remembers their K-12 experience knows that grades and test scores (the most common and easiest way to quantify academic achievement) doesn't necessarily mean 'learning'.

The point that we now can make claims about how children "learn better" or "prefer to learn" from survey data is over-stating it at best, confusing correlation with causation at worst.

Rockwell suggests that "the results aren't available online yet," but they are. They're posted on the ednext link.

The author did control for student-teacher race and ethnicity, class size, teacher certification, # of years teaching, etc.

Do Broadsheet authors read the data before reporting on them?

I agree with previous posters--stop with the name-calling. I don't care if it is Katherine Harris or Ann Coulter. Just stop.

It detracts from the coverage of an otherwise detailed (more detailed than I could find on most major media outlets) account of Harris' statements.

Liberals and progressives have to be better than name-calling.

have you been to a zoo or aquarium within the last 10 years? If you have, you can't say this guy (and others who make humans touching animals as spectacle) doesn't have an impact. How much space is now taken up in these places to let kids touch the rays?

The only thing I thought after hearing about Irwin's death was....is the ray ok?

I don't know if this is really going to bring attention to the work that moms (and dads) do. Instead, it will probably be individualized as, gosh, what rotten kids those must be to drive that lady to go on strike.

I'm no social movements scholar, but my impression of a strike is a group response to exploitative capitalist relations. I'm trying to identify who the mom is striking against--the kids? Are they really exploiting her labor or are they just not behaving nicely? It seems as though the mom isn't against doing mom labor normally, she just doesn't like the recent response it is evoking from her bratty children. I don't know if I'd equate this to a 'strike'.

I guess the 'strike' framework is the only language available to parents to protest their struggle is telling of how little we recognize the labor parents do.

a strip club.

Anyone who's been to an academic conference knows these things are all about performance (probably more so in the humanities and social sciences).

Some people use powerpoint; some people use a pole.

Guess which one is privileged--seen as appropriate and acceptable?

How is using my body (elevating my voice, waving with my hand, pointing to data on a powerpoint, smiling at the audience) different than using my body (taking off clothing) to get the audience's attention?

Besides the obvious difference is power that one performance has over the other, you're still using your body and performing for the audience. One is acceptable, one isn't. The sexy one keeps "some feminists" who don't want to "see pasties and corsetry make an appearance at work" able to distinguish themselves from those 'other' women.

it was called an undershirt.

I saw her speak at a small women's college in early spring of 2000. Anyone who has ever heard her talk for more than a soundbite knows what I'm talking about so I won't bore with details, but it was her caveat that she gave before the Q&A session that clinched it: "There's nothing I can tell you about George W. Bush that you don't already know."

I think about this a lot when I'm surrounded by family and friends whose sole conversations revolve around how shocked (shocked!) they are about what GWB has done now. Given six months before GWB's first presidential election, Ann Richards' warning still rings true.

If you are suspicious of when science is being done in the name of all, or nearly all, women, you should be equally suspicious when science is being done in the name of all, or nearly all, men.

go to the one who is less superficially invested in the idea of a 'wedding'. Really, if one or either of these couples are high-matinence kind of people, their wedding(s) will be a bore. Guaranteed. They'll move from one photo op to another, with you sitting in the hot sun in pantyhose trying to avoid the weird uncle who stares at everyone's chest.

Or, pick the one that will have the open bar.

what are they like? are they similar to BCPs? if so, just having some around the house isn't necessarily a cure-all for self-righteous doctors. (Of course, I'm still waiting for the health-conscious vegan pharmacist to deny someone cholestrol medication...)

A current inventory of my BCPs show an expiration date for less than a year from now. I don't know if this is common, but the idea of adequately preparing could be a lot more complicated than just stock up on Plan B.