Yay, it’s exciting to hear that science is becoming a big initiative. Perhaps I’ll stay as a science teacher and see where things go.

Published Online: April 11, 2008

Fostering a ‘Science Generation’ Seen as U.S. Imperative

Previous generations of Americans have been labeled Generation X, the Greatest Generation, and the Lost Generation, but if the young people of today want to succeed amid the souped-up competition of the global economy, they had better become the Science Generation.

Or so said a high-profile lineup of speakers at “Science Generation: A National Imperative,” a gathering held here last week at the American Museum of Natural History.

“My daughter and your children will … in all likelihood inherit a lower standard of living,” unless U.S. students acquire greater passion for science, said U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon of Tennessee, the Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Science and Technology. “We have to have the kind of technical workforce that can compete, and we simply don’t have that now.”

It was the latest in a long line of convocations—most of which have been long on education policy wonks and business leaders—focused on the need for better education in the so-called STEM fields: science, technology, engineering, and math.

Branching Out

But it was through the breadth of fields represented that its organizers aimed to set this conference apart from the swarm of other STEM-oriented gatherings over the past few years. Speakers included an investment banker, a paleontologist, and a group of local public school students, to name a few.

“The idea was to broaden the conversation to a broad range of branches and fields,” said Ellen V. Futter, the president of the American Museum of Natural History, which organized and hosted the two-day event.

Science, she said, “has ramifications for all aspects of our lives.” Science and other STEM-field education has been at the forefront of national policy conversations off and on since the start of the Space Race a half-century ago, including during the time of A Nation at Risk, the landmark 1983 federal report on the shortcomings of U.S. schooling in science and other subjects that turns 25 this month.

But a series of more recent reports, including the 2005 National Academies book Rising Above the Gathering Storm, which details the slippage of American international competitiveness and a need for more science education and other investments, have sharpened interest among policymakers and educators.

A follow-up conference organized by the National Academies and the National Math and Science Initiative, “Rising Above the Gathering Storm Two Years Later: Accelerating Progress Toward a Brighter Economic Future,” is scheduled for later this month in Washington.

Funding Urged

At last week’s meeting, big ideas were not in short supply. Some participants took the opportunity to advocate favorite initiatives.

“If Congress wants to make a dent in education, I highly recommend that … every child in this country have a laptop,” said Nicholas Negroponte, a former head of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Laboratory. He now leads the Cambridge, Mass.-based nonprofit One Laptop per Child Foundation, which aims to distribute low-cost laptop computers to children in poor countries and the United States.

Newt Gingrich, a former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives who participated in the event by videoconference, suggested a debate among presidential candidates solely on the subject of science.

But several participants noted that ideas alone would not suffice, and that conferences whose only outcome is a consensus that a problem exists do little to solve it.

“We don’t need more panels,” said panelist William S. Schmidt, a Michigan State University researcher.

“We’ve got the plan. Now we’ve just got to fund it and move forward,” said Rep. Gordon, referring to the federal America COMPETES Act, which incorporates proposals for more college science scholarships, new programs to train science teachers, and more research funding.

Many of the programs in the legislation, which was approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush last year, have not been financed.

“It’s time to stop studying this,” Rep. Gordon said. “It’s time to do something.”

National Curriculum?

One idea supported by many conference speakers was that of a national science curriculum. Former North Carolina Gov. James B. Hunt Jr., and Michael D. Casserly, the executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools—a Washington-based organization representing many of the nation’s largest urban districts—both heartily endorsed the idea. “The laws of math and science don’t really change when they cross state lines,” Mr. Casserly noted.

“I believe national standards in science education are absolutely essential,” said Mr. Hunt, now the chairman of the James B. Hunt Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. But he cautioned that such standards won’t work if they’re mandated by federal education officials, or even if federal money is used to set them up.

“The way I see this as being done is … with these state and local leaders coming together,” he said. “I think it will need to be funded privately—perhaps with corporations.”

None of the numerous corporate officers present at the conference immediately threw thousand-dollar bills on the stage at the mention of that notion. But all signed on to the idea that businesses need to do their part to get students more interested in science, if only out of self-interest.

“The private sector has got to be a major leader, because the private sector has to have people … for the jobs of the 21st century,” said Robert D. Hormats, a vice chairman at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the large investment bank based here. “This economy, this country is going to sink or swim together.”

Input From Children

Panelists also weighed in with other ideas.

Mr. Gingrich called on Congress to triple the budget of the National Science Foundation, a federal agency that supports a broad range of programs in mathematics and science education, calling his own failure to do so “the greatest mistake of my speakership.”

Neil DeGrasse Tyson, the director of the museum’s Hayden Planetarium, took a different tack, suggesting that NASA’s budget be tripled instead as a way of inspiring more students to become fascinated with science.

“With all due respect to the NSF, I don’t know anyone who says, ‘When I want to grow up, I want to be an NSF researcher,’ ” Mr. Tyson said. “That has never happened—ever … in K-12.”

Another idea came from Becca Robison, a 16-year-old from Layton, Utah, who has earned enough credits through an early-college program to be considered a college sophomore majoring in engineering and physics at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah.

“We should talk to the kids and see what they want to do,” said Ms. Robison, who founded AstroTots, a free science camp for girls ages 4 through 10 that is based in her hometown and operates in 10 states.

But the ideas on how best to improve science education offered by children at the conference diverged just as much as did those of the adult panelists.

In an interview following a panel discussion among students from the public World Journalism Preparatory School—a small, 2-year-old school in the Queens section of New York City serving grades 6-10—the young people were emphatic that something about their science education had to change. But they did not agree about how.

Giananthony Damasco, 15, unfavorably compared New York’s science curriculum, which he said tried to cover too much, with the more selective, more in-depth science his cousin in Italy is studying.

“If we just focused more,” Mr. Damasco suggested, more learning might get done.

Fellow student Raymond Arroyo, also 15, proposed an opposite remedy, complaining that the curriculum was too narrow. “Right now, it’s all about global warming, global warming, global warming,” he said. “I think what we need to do is be balanced.”

But, as panelists pointed out, just that kind of intellectual sparring, coupled with open-ended inquiry, is the foundation of science.

“We are gathered here not to identify the problem, but to jump-start and accelerate action to remedy the problem,” said Ms. Futter, the museum’s president. In that regard, she said, “we do think we’ve advanced the ball.”

The “infamous” Quality Reviewers are coming! The quality reviewers are coming!

I had no idea who they were so and no one had the time to tell me or explain to me so i finally googled it and found out.

 Great! I’m nervous now. I’m not sure if I can enjoy me weekend.

Who conducts the Quality Reviews?

Each Quality Review is conducted by one reviewer.  In larger schools with more than 1,000 students, two reviewers will be deployed or even three.  In every case, the reviewer is an experienced educator and former school leader.

The Quality Reviews are being conducted by Cambridge Education, an experienced external review provider and trainer for schools in America, the United Kingdom, and other countries throughout the world.

In addition, the Department of Education is training personnel, including local instructional superintendents (LISs), principals, and others to be reviewers, so that in three to four years the Department of Education can sustain the Quality Review process in New York City public schools using only Department of Education employees.

Quality Review training includes learning about data, things to look for in classroom visits, the daily operations of schools, and how to talk to the different contingencies within school communities.  The reviewers are trained to look for alignment between professional development, budget, scheduling, use of data, etc., in order to provide useful and meaningful feedback to the school. Trainees must then shadow an experienced reviewer and learn how to implement their training.

Before shadowing a reviewer or conducting an individual review, all reviewers are asked if there is any conflict of interest or potential reason that may cause an unfair evaluation of the assigned schools.  All New York City Department of Education trained reviewers conduct their shadowing and Quality Reviews outside of their region in schools with which they are unfamiliar.  The Department of Education takes every precaution possible to make sure there is no bias in the Quality Reviews.  There is also an appeals process that a principal can initiate during or after the Quality Review process if they feel their reviewer is biased.

The reviewer usually spends the equivalent of two full days (spread over three days) on-site at the school.  However, reviewers and principals spend a considerable amount of time preparing for the site visit.  Reviewers look over the general facts of the school, and principals and their leadership teams are asked to complete a school self-evaluation form prior to the review.  Schools are encouraged to complete the school self-evaluation form collaboratively with a representation of the entire school community.  This allows the reviewer to focus their time on assessing the quality of the school during the actual on-site visit.  Given the extensive experience, training, and preparation of each reviewer as well as the overwhelmingly positive responses of principals who participated in the Quality Review pilot, the Department of Education believes the equivalent of two full days on-site is sufficient time for each school visit.  To compensate for slightly larger or smaller schools, the time may be slightly increased or decreased.

During the on-site visit, the reviewer has plenty of time to review student plans and interventions, sit in on classes, talk with students, assess student work quality, meet with staff, and observe school planning sessions.  In addition, the reviewer will conduct two case studies of students and observe a collaborative activity in the school.

Quality Reviews are conducted as a support to the school and are designed to be a collaborative exercise between the reviewer and the principal.  Therefore, on the final day of the review, reviewers make recommendations and discuss them with the principal during the debriefing session.

On the last day of the on-site visit, the reviewer leaves a short one- to two- page write-up on strength and improvement areas at the school.  The final report is sent to the schools within four weeks.  The Quality Review report is approximately 12 to 14 pages long and is sent to the school as a draft in PDF format. The report is divided into four areas: the school context (one page), the overview (one to two pages), the main findings (six to eight pages), and the school quality criteria scoring summary (two pages).

The school then has one week to review the report and send the Department of Education changes of factual information or highlight discrepancies.  As a result of the ongoing communication between the reviewer and the principal, the reviewer’s final written report should not present any major surprises to the school principal.  In fact, during the pilot of more than 100 schools, only four schools sent a correction and one requested a word usage change.

For the case study portion of the Quality Review, schools choose two students who entered the school at the same time and were at similar academic levels in reading, writing, and mathematics.  One student is chosen because they have made good progress over the course of the year.  The second student is chosen because the child remains at the same entering level, showing little or no progress.  The reviewer then tries to pinpoint the differences in support and intervention services that the school provided to the students to cause the difference in achievement outcomes.

After conducting these pilot case studies, the Department of Education found that in many instances, this type of comparison between student outcomes did not occur at the school.  However, many schools came to see the value in doing case studies and will integrate similar practices into their own work.  Through the case studies, the reviewers were also able to see and document best practices—such as regularly scheduled time where teachers talk about different students’ support and intervention plans—that can be replicated in other schools.

The overwhelming majority of principals have been very happy with the outcomes of the Quality Review pilot.  Some of their feedback is below.

“I read with great interest the New York City DOE Quality Review Draft.  We at the school deeply appreciated [the] presence of [our reviewer.]  We want to thank her for both her insights and warmth.  Her genuine concern for education was evident throughout the review process.  What she said about us has helped us to feel very positive about incredible efforts we are making to serve our students well.  In her report, she captured the essence of what we have been trying to do, and what still needs to be tackled, and I am grateful for that.  [Our reviewer's] recommendations about the opportunities for further improvement will be addressed with the greatest vigilance.  Again, I thank you for the evaluation – and for the opportunity to participate in this pilot program.”

“I really enjoyed the process and reading the draft.  Next stage is to share with all.  This has been such a positive experience – many thanks.”

“I believe I speak for my entire school community—staff, students, parents, and administrative team—when I say that we thoroughly enjoyed the time spent with [our reviewer]! It really was nice to have her join her school community (she really did—sporting her…school T-shirt for School Spirit Day) these past two days. Moreover, her knowledge and experience helped us to look at our school through a critical lens and has provided us with an invaluable learning experience.”

The Quality Review process is designed to shed new light on a school’s quality through an extensive and rigorous evaluation process.  Reviewers have been chosen in part because of their proven “eye” for determining school quality.

During a Quality Review, a reviewer has a set of questions to ask different constituencies in the school in order to compare their answers.  For example, the reviewer will ask the principal how decisions about curriculum are made, and then ask the same question of the assistant principals, teachers, parents, and other key personnel at the school to see if the responses are aligned.  To ensure honest responses, these meetings will take place without the presence of the principal.

A reviewer also has full access to the school and is expected to use this access.  A reviewer may walk by a class and ask to sit in on it.  A reviewer may ask to see class homework from the previous school day or pick a student name at random and ask to see the academic plan for that child.  If a school says it is focusing its attention on student improvement in math, a reviewer may ask to see where changes to the school’s budget and professional development reflect the school’s shift in focus to math.  All of the evidence a reviewer collects is then entered into their record book and used to write their final report.

As the pilot has shown, although reviewers must ask challenging questions, most principals and members of their teams rise to the challenge and do not brush issues aside.  A principal’s responsibility is to improve the performance of his or her school and students, and the review process results in fresh, straight-forward, honest, and timely feedback for the school that can help principals and their team improve student achievement.

Schools are asked by reviewers to show evidence of a positive, constructive, and collaborative relationship with parents.  The reviewer looks to see how a school’s expectations about student achievement are communicated to parents, and how parents’ responses to those expectations are then factored into student achievement plans.

During the Quality Review, reviewers will have the opportunity to speak to parents both formally and informally.  Built into the schedule is time for the reviewer to interview parents.  These parents are selected at the discretion of both the school principal and the reviewer.

In addition to the scheduled interviews, the reviewer often has the opportunity to speak with parents during arrivals, dismissals, or during the day.  In several instances, parent groups have invited the Department of Education to make a Quality Review presentation after speaking with a reviewer at their school.

The Department of Education is currently determining how best to include constituencies beyond Department of Education personnel.  The New York City Department of Education plans to build capacity by training LISs, principals, and others to be reviewers so that in three to five years the Department of Education can sustain the Quality Review process in our schools without external partners.

The Quality Review process is a highly consistent process because:

• every reviewer undergoes the same training, follows the same review process, and submits the same report formats;

• team reviewer meetings are held to share best practices with teams and team leaders;

• reviewers went to schools in pairs during the Quality Review pilot to ensure quality and consistency;

• all reviewers attend a joint review and evaluation meeting. During this meeting, principals offer feedback to the Department of Education and the Quality Review provider on the quality and value of the review process;

• the Department of Education tracks how the reviewers score each school and looks for patterns or information that might flag areas of concern;

• an appeals process is maintained for schools that feel the Quality Review did not capture the reality of their school; and

• schools give feedback on the process and on the report.

The Department of Education conducts quality assurance samples from time to time by sending two or more reviewers to conduct the Quality Review at the same time.  These reviewers do not have any interaction with each other during the process, but compare results and assure that the Department of Education’s tools are valid and that all the reviewers are aligned to the evaluation criteria set forth by the Department of Education.

http://www.teachermagazine.org/tm/articles/2008/02/23/08apsmartmoney_web.h19.html

Published: February 23, 2008

Students Learn Money Lessons

document.write(”); document.write(”); document.write(‘‘); document.write(‘‘); document.write(”); document.write(”); document.write(‘

‘); <A href=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/tm/tm;13;sz=300×250;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;abr=!ie6;tile=3;ord=45572434?”><IMG src=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/tm/tm;13;sz=300×250;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;abr=!ie6;tile=3;ord=45572434?” width=”300″ height=”250″ border=0 ALT=”"></A>

<a href=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/tm/tm;13;sz=300×250;tile=3;ord=45572434?” target=”_blank”> <img src=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/tm/tm;13;sz=300×250;tile=3;ord=45572434?” width=”300″ height=”250″ border=”0″ alt=”"></a>

Louise S. McGehee School fourth-grader Lizzie Stockmeyer is only 9, but she’s already tackled one of life’s most painful lessons: To spend money, one must make money.

“Everyone likes chocolate cookies, and most girls love purses, that’s why I am selling purses with cookies in them,” Lizzie said as she held up a hot pink, fuzzy-fabric purse that she made after ordering the pattern off the Internet.

Classmates clamored to get a look at her merchandise. “I sold 14 purses quick!” she said. “My friends like that for $5 you get two things, not just one.”

Each month, as part of a schoolwide program to promote financial literacy, third- through 12th-grade students at McGehee in New Orleans study the fundamentals of real-life economics.

McGehee Headmistress Eileen Powers assigned faculty member Carla Robertson the task of implementing a program, modeled after the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy’s national standards, that would empower their students to make sound financial decisions in the future.

“I might buy some necklaces today or save my money,” Lizzie said as she eyed some Mardi Gras-inspired masks and jewelry made by her classmates. “We’ve learned that it’s nice to buy things, but thinking about how you earn and save is, like, more important.”

Teaching kids about money is nothing new. But McGehee’s administrators are hoping to take the concept further by incorporating tiered, progressive financial literacy lessons into traditional components of reading, writing and arithmetic.

Seven- to 8-year-old elementary students, for example, learn how to earn money and sell things at regular marketplaces they stage in their classrooms. Then, as pre-teen middle schoolers, they start to create their own business plans and think about such essentials as health and car insurance. Finally, as high school students, most of the young women will work on building a portfolio and investigating the careers that might afford them their desired adult lifestyles.

It is Powers’ hope that one day lessons about fixed- and variable-rate mortgages won’t be discussed only in an upper-level economics class, but also in a student’s math course. Already in elementary school levels, where students earn a weekly virtual paycheck, students must decide whether to have insurance premiums deducted from their paychecks.

If a student should opt not to take the deduction, a trip to the school nurse’s office can take on added meaning by costing them a week’s pay.

“By using such curriculum, we’re now able to drive home some very concrete issues on a level they seem to very easily understand,” said Powers, who is pleased by the enthusiasm both the faculty and students have shown for the programming. “For the most part, these issues are largely overlooked, but as a girls’ school, we want to make sure every girl who graduates from McGehee leaves knowing how to effectively manage their finances and feels completely comfortable in doing so.”

Powers said her father passed away when she was young, and she’ll never forget how her mother was at a loss to figure out the family’s financial situation. It is Powers’ mission to make sure the students under her charge are as educated about practical issues pertaining to money as they are on substance abuse and health issues affecting women. She selected Robertson to develop the school’s plan because Robertson and her husband have worked financial wonders within their own lives.

“We’ve done some things to get smart about money: paid off our house and car, built up our savings and tried to live a lifestyle where we make purchases based on how much of our energy might be spent on any one particular item,” Robertson said.

She often uses the example of buying a pair of shoes to illustrate to students that a $40 pair of shoes equals five hours of work if they’re making $8 an hour. “When you present things to yourself or others in such a way,” she said, “it really makes you think: Are the shoes really worth five hours of my life?”

In McGehee’s classrooms, the money lessons among grade-school students often center around earnings and financial decision-making. Though most fifth-graders tend to believe their parents are their only source of money, often paid via allowances, McGehee teachers try to instill in every student that no matter what their age they have the potential to generate their own income.

“These are things that as a kid I never knew,” Robertson said. “And some subjects, like making investments and plans for retirement, most adults I know have yet to figure out. What we try and teach the girls is they don’t have to save, save and never spend, but they do need to know how their decisions now can affect their future, and they don’t have to be afraid when it comes to any kind of financial decision.”

Debby Pigman, teacher of the upper school’s elective course in economics, doesn’t doubt her students will make smart money decisions. In her classes, students participate in the Stock Market Game and also use computer simulation models to see what career might afford them the opportunity to live and work in the city of their choice.

The students have become steadily more aggressive in their investment strategies, Pigman said, and began to think through their future plans with much more detail. With the help of regular visits from community members and local business operators, Pigman said the junior- and senior-level students have developed some strong ideas about what they want to do in the future.

Most of the girls dove eagerly into investing and wisely chose companies they often patronize, such as Apple, Gap, Polo and even McDonald’s. Routinely, the class links to company Web sites to track their stocks and report on losses or earnings.

The class discussions often turn to current events, Pigman said, as many of the students find their stock choices affected by recession fears.

“Their lessons come straight from the headlines on some days, as so much of what is being covered these days is about our economy and our future,” Pigman said. “The reality is the students that are sitting here today might not have Social Security or low interest rates, and, should that be the case, we want them to be prepared to handle it all.”

I don’t think I am getting anywhere with these students. I don’t know what to do to motivate them or help them. I feel like a horrible teacher. So many kids are still not understanding science.

It’s the middle of January, and I’m feeling disheartened and overwhelmed. I just don’t know what to do. The kids, the parents, the administration, and the curriculum are all wearing me down.

It still remains a struggle to pre-assess and post-assess. My major focus now has been my failure to figure out what prior knowledge my students know about certain concepts. It is definitely like pulling teeth and is really tricky. You have to ask the right questions.

Handhelds in the Classroom – Tools for Teachers

By Cyndi Pride
August 1, 2003
URL: http://www.techlearning.com/showArticle.php?articleID=12803444

A handheld may also be called a handheld computer, handheld PC, pocket PC, or a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant). People sometimes refer to them by the manufacturer’s name: Palm or Handspring. With most handhelds, users input information with a stylus or a separate keyboard, although a few models have begun to include a thumb-pad keyboard. Generally handhelds use the Palm OS (Palm Operating System) or a Pocket PC version of Windows.

Handhelds are popular because of their portability; however, other features make them invaluable tools. Handhelds can sync (synchronize) data with a desktop computer and share data with other users through infrared ports. Many of them can connect to the Internet wirelessly or through a modem to enable users to pull down information from the Internet or access email. Some models have expansion slots for additional memory or for peripheral equipment, such as digital cameras and scientific probes. Handhelds come with a basic software package, which typically includes “business” applications such as a date book, memo pad, to-do list and address books. The Pocket PC platform has a special version of MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint that sync with desktop computers. Palm Pilots now come with Documents To Go, which also permits users to easily move documents from handheld to computer or back. Additional software titles are available for both operating systems, although there are many more titles for Palm OS. Users can access software that enables them to download and read books, keep track of student grades and make diagrams. Software developers are beginning to recognize the value of this tool in education and are beginning to develop additional applications to help administrators, teachers and students.

Handhelds for Teachers

In the spring of 2001 a group of Beaufort County School District teachers had the opportunity to use handhelds to assist in data collection and management of student learning. The teachers explored assessment strategies and experimented or invented ways in which to use the handheld as a tool. At the end of the school year one teacher commented, “I don’t know what I would do without the Palm. The Palm allows me to walk around, monitor and record what I am seeing. This freedom of movement allows me to be a better record keeper, better assessor; and hopefully, a better teacher.” Teachers also commented that using the Palm to record observations of student behaviors provided them with a comprehensive picture of learning, yielding formative data that was useful in guiding the development of lessons and activities. Teachers liked having all of their information in one place and appreciated having a tool that they could take anywhere to record or access student information.

In addition to the generally accepted use of each of the basic Palm applications, teachers found creative ways to take advantage of the technology.

Yesterday I was really stressed out for not being able to explain an assignment in a clear way to my students. The students were really rude and calling out at the same time, “What do we do again? Can you say that again? I don’t understand? I don’t understand? What are you talking about?”, that it really stressed me out.

A lot of the times when things go wrong or the students do something entirely different from what I had expected, I blame myself for not being explicit or clear enough. However today, when I collected work, I found that the student that I least expected to understand my assignment actually did my assignment PERFECTLY.

Why didn’t I expect her to understand? Well, she has only been in the States for 2 years, and is still learning English. Everyone else’s English is much better than hers, and she was able to understand what my expectations were. Now I realize that I shouldn’t be so hard on myself. It’s not me. It’s the kids.

I have just become aware that I have been creating a lot of drama since becoming a teacher. Who knew? Many of the parents are accusing me that I am racist and have it against their child. They don’t believe that it is perhaps their children who have it against MOI! <sigh>

The good thing is, that the parent coordinator of the school knows me, and is a strong woman who will tell the truth and back me up to the end. I love her to death for this. I am so blessed she is on my side. Despite all the hardships I am facing as a teacher at this school, at times I feel so lucky that I have some people, besides the parent coordinator, who I can always trust to be nonjudgmental and will be there to support me when everyone is trying to drown me.

I am going to keep on swimming against the current.

I made it through the highest drop out month–the month of November. I should give myself a pat on the back since I am still in the game. However, at times, it is just hard to keep on going if you don’t see any positive results.

These past three months have at times seemed like an eternity and other times seem like they flew by. Everyday, it seems like I failed. I have broken down many times and cried profusely. I feel like the most horrible teacher.

(This was an entry I meant to publish the week after Thanksgiving. I’m glad to say, my crying spree has stopped momentarily. I have just one more week now until some vacation time.)