tonyHK12
11-09 02:18 PM
I am sure many of you would agree with the below observations -
I lost money in the 2001 stock market because I believed that the market could never down based on all the glorious research reports..
I lost money again in 2005 as I bought a house believing that a house value can only go up, again reading all the real estate boom that was happening around.
Now, I keep reading that the Indian market is oh-so good that everyone should go back to India to live in the villas and ride around in the chauffeured cars:)
Hmm, as always, I have been the last one to get on the boat before it went under. So, with all pun intended, what Indian ETF should I start investing and when should I buy my one-way ticket :rolleyes:
As my mom always says - Mountains always look smooth from a distance. This time I think I will stay put and wait it out for my GC..
Agreed it is not good to blindly trust the media. Stocks, housing, 401K - financial institutions have a vested interest in getting a bulk of your investments and are big political contributors and fund some media outlets.
But who would benefit if a reputed London company talks against US immigration, not the UK. This is not even an Indian news paper.
But your GC is close anyway so its good to wait, but try to find an unbaised opinion, only your friends and relatives may be able to help you out with reality.
I lost money in the 2001 stock market because I believed that the market could never down based on all the glorious research reports..
I lost money again in 2005 as I bought a house believing that a house value can only go up, again reading all the real estate boom that was happening around.
Now, I keep reading that the Indian market is oh-so good that everyone should go back to India to live in the villas and ride around in the chauffeured cars:)
Hmm, as always, I have been the last one to get on the boat before it went under. So, with all pun intended, what Indian ETF should I start investing and when should I buy my one-way ticket :rolleyes:
As my mom always says - Mountains always look smooth from a distance. This time I think I will stay put and wait it out for my GC..
Agreed it is not good to blindly trust the media. Stocks, housing, 401K - financial institutions have a vested interest in getting a bulk of your investments and are big political contributors and fund some media outlets.
But who would benefit if a reputed London company talks against US immigration, not the UK. This is not even an Indian news paper.
But your GC is close anyway so its good to wait, but try to find an unbaised opinion, only your friends and relatives may be able to help you out with reality.
Shujaat
05-15 12:56 PM
Hi
gc_bulgaria
10-12 12:20 PM
I am planning for my visa in Jan at Mumbai consulate. I do not have any relatives in either mumbai/pune who can submit my documents 3 days before the appointment.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
DallasBlue
09-01 11:07 AM
yes it looks like a boiler plate RFE. you will just need to be cautious with the information you are giving to RFE and Make sure it is consistent with what ever you provided earlier.
Also, get your collegues/managers from previous company to give you letters stating that you worked with him/her for that company during the stated period. Like explained above get as much consisten evidences liek w2's pay stubbs for that period. For the Ability to pay , have your company get with the CPA and prepare those statements.
dont panic, roughly 3 out of 10 do get RFE's. guess it has become more common with the increased workload ...
Also, get your collegues/managers from previous company to give you letters stating that you worked with him/her for that company during the stated period. Like explained above get as much consisten evidences liek w2's pay stubbs for that period. For the Ability to pay , have your company get with the CPA and prepare those statements.
dont panic, roughly 3 out of 10 do get RFE's. guess it has become more common with the increased workload ...
more...
tnite
07-19 10:18 AM
Can you start residency on EAD if you are the primary for 485? Meaning, can you use AC21 and change jobs from research to residency after 180 days from filing? Please help, really confused.
I dont think so .maybe some one chime in
The job description and job title should match what he was doing earlier , If I am right
I dont think so .maybe some one chime in
The job description and job title should match what he was doing earlier , If I am right
iman.karta
04-23 11:32 AM
Quick question you said they asked you to submit your legal status papers since 1999 which was when you went out of country? I have 2 questions
1) Since when have you been in US, rather first time when did you come to US
2) Did you never leave US after 1999. This is because the status really matters only since your last arrival on visa. Earlier records do not matter as per 245(k) memo. This question will help other forum members who have some kind of status violation
your responses will be appreciated.
Rockstart,
I apologize for the tardy response.
I first entered the US in 1997 using F-1 visa. I traveled back to Indonesia (my home country) 1999 for the holiday. After that, I never travelled out of the US. Since then, I have worked and obtained H1-B and am in the last stage of I-485. PD is ROW (of course) and biometrics code 3 was done a while ago. Hence, I believe USCIS requested RFE since 1999; the last time I travelled out of the country.
I always maintain a legal status.
I hope this helps. If you have rather a more personal msg, please feel free to email me. I am more than glad to give you more info and help you.
1) Since when have you been in US, rather first time when did you come to US
2) Did you never leave US after 1999. This is because the status really matters only since your last arrival on visa. Earlier records do not matter as per 245(k) memo. This question will help other forum members who have some kind of status violation
your responses will be appreciated.
Rockstart,
I apologize for the tardy response.
I first entered the US in 1997 using F-1 visa. I traveled back to Indonesia (my home country) 1999 for the holiday. After that, I never travelled out of the US. Since then, I have worked and obtained H1-B and am in the last stage of I-485. PD is ROW (of course) and biometrics code 3 was done a while ago. Hence, I believe USCIS requested RFE since 1999; the last time I travelled out of the country.
I always maintain a legal status.
I hope this helps. If you have rather a more personal msg, please feel free to email me. I am more than glad to give you more info and help you.
more...
ashrock11
01-08 09:06 PM
Hi,
Just wanted to know how should one modify the immigration petition again after divorce and second marriage. Can the second wife name be added to 485 immediately or wait for the PD to become current? And how about EAD?
Thanks
Just wanted to know how should one modify the immigration petition again after divorce and second marriage. Can the second wife name be added to 485 immediately or wait for the PD to become current? And how about EAD?
Thanks
stillhowlong
01-19 05:55 PM
As far as I know:
if your E3 (approved) priority date is current for E2 (approved), you can file 485 (in E2) requesting to use the earliest (E3) priority date. From my understanding, you may be able to do it even when your E2 is pending - but it may be better to wait till you get the E2 approved. Hope it clarifies your question.
Thanks Alvin, so you mean to say it does not matter if I do that process with new employer right?
if your E3 (approved) priority date is current for E2 (approved), you can file 485 (in E2) requesting to use the earliest (E3) priority date. From my understanding, you may be able to do it even when your E2 is pending - but it may be better to wait till you get the E2 approved. Hope it clarifies your question.
Thanks Alvin, so you mean to say it does not matter if I do that process with new employer right?
more...
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
anilsal
06-29 04:30 PM
most of the Schengen consulates (Germany, France, Switzerland, Norway etc) are being forced into performing biometrics (aka fingerprinting) before issuing visas. This is going to be another hurdle before you actually are issued a Schengen visa. At least the consulate lady I talked to recently was not looking forward to the biometric requirement. Not sure when the requirement kicks in.
If you want to get UK visa, you are anyway required to do fingerprints similar to your EAD/485 FP at the USCIS centres. So this exercise will be followed by other consulates.
With the airlines suffering, I am wondering if there will be any respite to their woes.
If you want to get UK visa, you are anyway required to do fingerprints similar to your EAD/485 FP at the USCIS centres. So this exercise will be followed by other consulates.
With the airlines suffering, I am wondering if there will be any respite to their woes.
more...
mbartosik
03-12 03:33 PM
I am in ROW, EB2 if they processed the interfiling, EB3 if not, with a PD of Dec 2002, and receipt date of 5 May 2007.
My application was filed with Nebraska Service center, they moved to Texas (with SRC* receipt number), they moved back to Nebraska in October 2007.
Even on EB3 my PD is now current.
When they passed 60 days late according to processing times I raised a service request. They claim that they have 45 days to respond. Their 45 days will be up on Thursday, and I still have no response.
So here is my plan...
On Thursday call again. Raise another service request?
Make an Info pass appointment ? - not sure IO could tell me more in person than over phone.
On Thursday go see Congressman's office.
Come May 2008 (one year since filing I485) if there is still no suitable reply to service request file WOM. Their lack of response to service request should annoy the judge hopefully.
When I last spoke with an IO she thought that the notice date on the transfer notice was the processing date to use (Oct 2007) not the receipt date on it (May 2007). I believe she is plain wrong, and she was silent when I asserted that I believed she was wrong, and that's why the original receipt date is kept on the transfer notice. If someone has a link to the USCIS rule on this it would be helpful.
Any comments please?
My application was filed with Nebraska Service center, they moved to Texas (with SRC* receipt number), they moved back to Nebraska in October 2007.
Even on EB3 my PD is now current.
When they passed 60 days late according to processing times I raised a service request. They claim that they have 45 days to respond. Their 45 days will be up on Thursday, and I still have no response.
So here is my plan...
On Thursday call again. Raise another service request?
Make an Info pass appointment ? - not sure IO could tell me more in person than over phone.
On Thursday go see Congressman's office.
Come May 2008 (one year since filing I485) if there is still no suitable reply to service request file WOM. Their lack of response to service request should annoy the judge hopefully.
When I last spoke with an IO she thought that the notice date on the transfer notice was the processing date to use (Oct 2007) not the receipt date on it (May 2007). I believe she is plain wrong, and she was silent when I asserted that I believed she was wrong, and that's why the original receipt date is kept on the transfer notice. If someone has a link to the USCIS rule on this it would be helpful.
Any comments please?
brad_sk2
04-15 11:51 AM
Congratulations!
more...
velan
06-22 01:56 PM
Well said. Be positive and work with IV core team to get something done.
Just an assessment on where we are collectively as a group:
312 new members in June 2006
1100 new members in May 2006
1400 new members in April 2006
1000 new members in March 2006
400 new members in February 2006
600 new members in January 2006
4812 in total membership.
Each one of us should personally get involved in engaging legal immigrants who are affected by the retrogression problem. It is hard to imagine that there are 6-figure number of people in retrogression but there are less than 5-figure number (4812) of people participating in this voluntary effort undertaken by IV.
Please talk to people around you and make them aware of the situation. Creating an account in IV and clicking a button to send web faxes is the least these people can do for their own benefit.
I'm sure that IV core will also become stronger and can gain more leverage during negotiations/lobbying with the appropriate authorities.
On a side note, please have some faith in the strategic decisons made by IV core. I understand that a lot of people here are desperate to see some progress but I personally feel that IV core is on a great strategic path to acheive our goals. In the mean time, if each of us can do our part by recruiting 10 people to join IV by the end of July. We will be stronger and more effective.
Just imagine if our membership is close to 50000 by the end of July, we can take a rally just like the Irish lobby group. Ours will be much legitimate because we are not rallying for illegal immigrants, unlike them. So divert your time resources in the next month in achieving this goal and leave the strategic decision making to IV Core and QGA.
Peace out!
Just an assessment on where we are collectively as a group:
312 new members in June 2006
1100 new members in May 2006
1400 new members in April 2006
1000 new members in March 2006
400 new members in February 2006
600 new members in January 2006
4812 in total membership.
Each one of us should personally get involved in engaging legal immigrants who are affected by the retrogression problem. It is hard to imagine that there are 6-figure number of people in retrogression but there are less than 5-figure number (4812) of people participating in this voluntary effort undertaken by IV.
Please talk to people around you and make them aware of the situation. Creating an account in IV and clicking a button to send web faxes is the least these people can do for their own benefit.
I'm sure that IV core will also become stronger and can gain more leverage during negotiations/lobbying with the appropriate authorities.
On a side note, please have some faith in the strategic decisons made by IV core. I understand that a lot of people here are desperate to see some progress but I personally feel that IV core is on a great strategic path to acheive our goals. In the mean time, if each of us can do our part by recruiting 10 people to join IV by the end of July. We will be stronger and more effective.
Just imagine if our membership is close to 50000 by the end of July, we can take a rally just like the Irish lobby group. Ours will be much legitimate because we are not rallying for illegal immigrants, unlike them. So divert your time resources in the next month in achieving this goal and leave the strategic decision making to IV Core and QGA.
Peace out!
purgan
03-14 01:28 AM
So now we have it....an official National panel has declared it.
Immigration restrictionists are US schools have been doing just fine and so the country doesn't need scientists and engineers from abroad. Well, this just proves they have been llying all along...just because they don't like immigrants and don't want any competiton.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031301492_pf.html
===
Panel Urges Schools to Emphasize Core Math Skills
By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 14, 2008; A06
A presidential panel declared math education in the United States "broken" yesterday and called on schools to focus on ensuring that children master fundamental skills that provide the underpinnings for success in higher math and, ultimately, in high-tech jobs.[/B]
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel convened in April 2006 to address concerns that many students lack the know-how to become engineers and scientists. The 24-member panel of mathematicians, education experts and psychologists said yesterday that students need a deeper understanding of basic skills, including fluency with whole numbers and fractions. It urged more training and support for teachers and called on researchers to find ways to combat "mathematics anxiety."
Larry R. Faulkner, chairman of the panel and former president of the University of Texas at Austin, [B]said the country needs to make changes to stay competitive in an increasingly global economy. He noted that many U.S. companies draw skilled workers from overseas, a pool that he said is drying as opportunities abroad improve.
"Math education isn't just about a school subject," Faulkner said as the panel released its final report at Fairfax County's Longfellow Middle School. "It's fundamentally about the chances that real people all across this country will have in life. And it's about the well-being and safety of the nation."
Scores from the 2006 Program for International Student Assessment showed 15-year-olds in the United States trailed peers from 23 industrialized countries in math.
The panel stressed that many students are simply befuddled by fractions. And one panel member noted that a recent survey of middle school students found that 84 percent would rather clean their room or take out the garbage than tackle math homework.
President Bush charged the panel with examining ways to ensure that students have a strong grasp of the building blocks needed for algebra, a gateway to higher math. Students who complete Algebra II are more likely to attend and graduate from college.
Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said the report's release was a "seminal moment" in math education and urged teachers, school boards, colleges, interest groups and parents to use it as a guidepost to refine instruction.
"I want every stakeholder in the equation of education to look at all of this and act on it," Spellings said. "I think there are very actionable steps right now. Teachers, starting today, can pay more attention to fractions."
The panel concluded that the math curricula and textbooks in elementary and middle schools typically cover too many topics without enough depth. It noted that countries in which children do best at math, including Singapore and Japan, emphasize core topics.
The panel identified benchmark skills that students need for a strong math foundation -- for example, that students be able to add and subtract whole numbers by the end of third grade. By the time students leave fifth grade, the panel said, they should be able to add and subtract fractions and decimals.
"I think the main message of this report is simple -- content is king," said Tom Loveless, panel member and director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution.
It's not just lessons that need to change, the panel said, but also the nation's attitudes about math. In a culture in which parents say they "weren't good at math either," children assume they don't have the talent for numbers. The panel said that research shows that practice pays off and that adults need to give students that message.
The panel also weighed in on the long-running battle between traditionalists, who favor a focus on memorization and drilling, and those who prefer stressing concepts and letting students make connections on their own. Students need to know math facts and have automatic recall, Faulkner said, but they also need "some element of discovery."
"I think this panel has gradually evolved to the view that most members believe that most effective teachers draw from both philosophies at different times," he said.
The panel met a dozen times, heard testimony from groups and individuals and reviewed thousands of research papers. The panel said that it is "self-evident" that teachers need to have strong math skills but that more research must be done to find the best ways to prepare them.
Local educators, business leaders and interest groups were delving into the report yesterday afternoon. School officials in Montgomery and Fairfax counties said the recommendations mirror efforts underway to help more children successfully complete an algebra course by the end of eighth grade.
Roy Romer, former governor of Colorado and chairman of Strong American Schools, said the report illustrates a need for states to voluntarily agree on standards that are "uniform for all of America and benchmarked against the rest of the world." The nonpartisan group seeks to make education a priority in the 2008 presidential election.
"We include too much, we're much too broad and we don't go deep enough," said Romer, who also served as Los Angeles school superintendent. "We put out these textbooks with 750 pages, and if you're a fourth-grade teacher, you can't teach 750 pages. You have to be selective."
Immigration restrictionists are US schools have been doing just fine and so the country doesn't need scientists and engineers from abroad. Well, this just proves they have been llying all along...just because they don't like immigrants and don't want any competiton.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031301492_pf.html
===
Panel Urges Schools to Emphasize Core Math Skills
By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 14, 2008; A06
A presidential panel declared math education in the United States "broken" yesterday and called on schools to focus on ensuring that children master fundamental skills that provide the underpinnings for success in higher math and, ultimately, in high-tech jobs.[/B]
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel convened in April 2006 to address concerns that many students lack the know-how to become engineers and scientists. The 24-member panel of mathematicians, education experts and psychologists said yesterday that students need a deeper understanding of basic skills, including fluency with whole numbers and fractions. It urged more training and support for teachers and called on researchers to find ways to combat "mathematics anxiety."
Larry R. Faulkner, chairman of the panel and former president of the University of Texas at Austin, [B]said the country needs to make changes to stay competitive in an increasingly global economy. He noted that many U.S. companies draw skilled workers from overseas, a pool that he said is drying as opportunities abroad improve.
"Math education isn't just about a school subject," Faulkner said as the panel released its final report at Fairfax County's Longfellow Middle School. "It's fundamentally about the chances that real people all across this country will have in life. And it's about the well-being and safety of the nation."
Scores from the 2006 Program for International Student Assessment showed 15-year-olds in the United States trailed peers from 23 industrialized countries in math.
The panel stressed that many students are simply befuddled by fractions. And one panel member noted that a recent survey of middle school students found that 84 percent would rather clean their room or take out the garbage than tackle math homework.
President Bush charged the panel with examining ways to ensure that students have a strong grasp of the building blocks needed for algebra, a gateway to higher math. Students who complete Algebra II are more likely to attend and graduate from college.
Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said the report's release was a "seminal moment" in math education and urged teachers, school boards, colleges, interest groups and parents to use it as a guidepost to refine instruction.
"I want every stakeholder in the equation of education to look at all of this and act on it," Spellings said. "I think there are very actionable steps right now. Teachers, starting today, can pay more attention to fractions."
The panel concluded that the math curricula and textbooks in elementary and middle schools typically cover too many topics without enough depth. It noted that countries in which children do best at math, including Singapore and Japan, emphasize core topics.
The panel identified benchmark skills that students need for a strong math foundation -- for example, that students be able to add and subtract whole numbers by the end of third grade. By the time students leave fifth grade, the panel said, they should be able to add and subtract fractions and decimals.
"I think the main message of this report is simple -- content is king," said Tom Loveless, panel member and director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution.
It's not just lessons that need to change, the panel said, but also the nation's attitudes about math. In a culture in which parents say they "weren't good at math either," children assume they don't have the talent for numbers. The panel said that research shows that practice pays off and that adults need to give students that message.
The panel also weighed in on the long-running battle between traditionalists, who favor a focus on memorization and drilling, and those who prefer stressing concepts and letting students make connections on their own. Students need to know math facts and have automatic recall, Faulkner said, but they also need "some element of discovery."
"I think this panel has gradually evolved to the view that most members believe that most effective teachers draw from both philosophies at different times," he said.
The panel met a dozen times, heard testimony from groups and individuals and reviewed thousands of research papers. The panel said that it is "self-evident" that teachers need to have strong math skills but that more research must be done to find the best ways to prepare them.
Local educators, business leaders and interest groups were delving into the report yesterday afternoon. School officials in Montgomery and Fairfax counties said the recommendations mirror efforts underway to help more children successfully complete an algebra course by the end of eighth grade.
Roy Romer, former governor of Colorado and chairman of Strong American Schools, said the report illustrates a need for states to voluntarily agree on standards that are "uniform for all of America and benchmarked against the rest of the world." The nonpartisan group seeks to make education a priority in the 2008 presidential election.
"We include too much, we're much too broad and we don't go deep enough," said Romer, who also served as Los Angeles school superintendent. "We put out these textbooks with 750 pages, and if you're a fourth-grade teacher, you can't teach 750 pages. You have to be selective."
more...
Sunx_2004
10-08 04:29 PM
I am also in the same situation. But not sure about H1 transfer. I posted all the questions to our lawyer and waiting for reply.
Did your attorney replied back?
Did your attorney replied back?
Dhundhun
04-24 12:31 PM
Hey god_bless_you,
God gave me a RED DOT.
Anyway, congrats again.
Enjoy.
God gave me a RED DOT.
Anyway, congrats again.
Enjoy.
more...
MetteBB
05-11 11:58 AM
and two more
mambarg
07-20 04:44 PM
Receipt notice not sure how long. I have not yet got it.
Approval notice has already come via mail in 7 days precise after status approved.
Again this is PP. So may be for PP it is only e-receipt and not actual receipt.
I am not sure.
This is exactly same case for another colleauge.
Approval notice has already come via mail in 7 days precise after status approved.
Again this is PP. So may be for PP it is only e-receipt and not actual receipt.
I am not sure.
This is exactly same case for another colleauge.
gctex
07-01 11:52 PM
Hi all,
In her passport, my wife's name appears as follows :
Given name = <blank>
Surname = <First name> <Last Name>
Now visa stamping has this :
Given Name = FNU
Surname = <First name> <Last Name>
We are filing I-485 this week and in all the forms we were thinking of giving :
Given Name = <First name>
Surname = <Last Name>
At the same time initiating a Name Split in the passport. Is it advisable to have name split in passport while I-485 is in process?.
There is actually no "name change" per se. Just splitting it and putting it under the correct first and last names. If we file it using FNU, then all her records like DL, SSN, EAD, AP & then GC all will be starting with FNU, which is what we want to avoid.
The ideal way would've been to split the name in passport first and then file it, but we are afraid we could get stuck with retrogression again, if the process gets delayed! :confused:
Please advise !
Thanx
-Gctex
In her passport, my wife's name appears as follows :
Given name = <blank>
Surname = <First name> <Last Name>
Now visa stamping has this :
Given Name = FNU
Surname = <First name> <Last Name>
We are filing I-485 this week and in all the forms we were thinking of giving :
Given Name = <First name>
Surname = <Last Name>
At the same time initiating a Name Split in the passport. Is it advisable to have name split in passport while I-485 is in process?.
There is actually no "name change" per se. Just splitting it and putting it under the correct first and last names. If we file it using FNU, then all her records like DL, SSN, EAD, AP & then GC all will be starting with FNU, which is what we want to avoid.
The ideal way would've been to split the name in passport first and then file it, but we are afraid we could get stuck with retrogression again, if the process gets delayed! :confused:
Please advise !
Thanx
-Gctex
s416504
08-29 12:24 PM
I saw many 2nd July Polls but doesn't have full proof information.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
hemamani
06-25 06:03 PM
Hi...
I called Ciudad Juarez, Mexico - -800-919-1754 (with a cost of US$7.00 per call payable by Visa or MasterCard) and checked up with the customer service with my petition number whether he could see my petition details in his system. He told me that he could see my petition details in the system. And, I asked him whether that information is from PIMS? But, he told me that he is not sure what system is that but he could see my petition information.
Does anyone have thoughts on this ... ie., MY Petition information is available in PIMS right now? If so, when will I get the passports stamped?
Thanks!
I called Ciudad Juarez, Mexico - -800-919-1754 (with a cost of US$7.00 per call payable by Visa or MasterCard) and checked up with the customer service with my petition number whether he could see my petition details in his system. He told me that he could see my petition details in the system. And, I asked him whether that information is from PIMS? But, he told me that he is not sure what system is that but he could see my petition information.
Does anyone have thoughts on this ... ie., MY Petition information is available in PIMS right now? If so, when will I get the passports stamped?
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment