Who doesn’t wish for more time to tackle the myriad tasks vying for our attention? You don’t need more hours in the day, though, only minutes. Tuneup your workflow with these time-saving tricks and you’ll find yourself getting more done in less time.
Use voice recognition
If you input a lot of data and you’re not a particularly fast typist, use voice recognition. A fairly mature technology, voice recognition has been built into the Windows operating system since Windows Vista and can be enabled from the Ease of Access applet found in the Control Panel.
Use Dragon NaturallySpeaking to create documents and control common PC programs.
You can also use a third-party app like Dragon NaturallySpeaking, which packs additional algorithms to leverage the context of the entire sentence for greater accuracy. Advanced features like the ability to launch applications, switch between them, or even initiate an Internet search allows you to navigate the desktop without having to lift a finger.
Synchronize your life
Be sure to configure your PC and devices to sync with each other so you can switch between them without missing a beat. Cloud storage services such as Dropbox, SugarSync, and SkyDrive make files accessible from any device with an Internet connection, while Web browsers such as Chrome and Firefox can keep your bookmarks and browser settings synchronized between laptops, desktops, and mobile devices.
Use a business card app
Those business cards you amassed at your last conference aren’t going to enter themselves into your address book. Fortunately, you don’t have to manually type each one in. Instead, you can use a business card scanner to capture the data in your contact list. If you don’t network enough to justify splurging on a dedicated card scanner, check out the many smartphone and tablet apps—such as CamCard and WorldCard HD—do the same with the built-in cameras found on mobile devices.
Upgrade to a solid state drive
If you’re still using a PC powered by a traditional hard disk drive (HDD), do yourself a favor and upgrade to the speedier solid-state drive (SSD). Your productivity—and blood pressure—will thank you for that, as you launch apps and move files around without a lag. As a bonus, physical bumps and jolts that would normally damage the spinning platter in a HDD are unlikely to have an affect an SSD. Of course, the flash memory chips inside an SSD works differently than a HDD though, so be sure to take proper care of it.
Put your laptop to sleep
Rather than manually powering your laptop off and on between appointments, set it to go into “Sleep” mode instead. This keeps power flowing to the system RAM to maintain the state of the PC, allowing it to power up fully in seconds. In general, the power drain on a modern laptop in sleep mode is sufficiently low that it isn’t a consideration for regular commutes.
To set this, go to Control Panel and click on Power Options. From there, select “Change advanced power settings” to bring up the “Power Options” dialog shown below.
Put your laptop in sleep mode when you’re in transit.
Don’t ignore the fingerprint scanner
Many business-class laptops come with an integrated fingerprint reader, which unfortunately sits unused most of the time. If your laptop has one, it shouldn’t take more than 10 minutes to configure it to recognize your digits using its preinstalled fingerprint management software. Being able to authenticate yourself using your fingerprint saves you precious seconds from not having to type your password every time you log into your laptop.
Get a second monitor
If you’ve never used a dual-monitor rig, you don’t know what you’re missing. Having additional desktop real estate allows you to position windows so that they are readily accessible without having to hunt through your taskbar for the app that you need. An alternative would be to go for a single-display setup with an ultra large screen measuring at least 27-inches. The additional space will allow you to line up more windows without too much overlapping.
Master your shortcut keys
Getting the hang of some common shortcut keys can help you get things done much faster. The most basic shortcuts would be CTRL+C, CTRL+V and CTRL+X, which are used for copy, paste, and cut, respectively. CTRL+Z and CTRL+Y allow you to undo and redo your last action, which is particularly useful in productivity apps such as a word processor.
For window management, the Windows Key+E combo brings up the Windows File Explorer, while ALT-F4 closes the current window. Finally, if you’re using your Web browser, holding on to the CTRL key while scrolling your wheel mouse zooms in and out of your document or browser window.
In wake of Hurricane Sandy, Oklahoma tornadoes, NSF awards $32 million in hazards sustainability grants
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
21-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Cheryl Dybas cdybas@nsf.gov 703-292-7734 National Science Foundation
Scientists will study ways of predicting and responding to hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires
Sandy: the deadliest and most destructive hurricane of the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season and the second-costliest hurricane in U.S. history. Damage estimates from the storm surpass $68 billion, a total exceeded only by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
With Sandy's one-year anniversary--October 29th--on the horizon, how do scientists better predict and respond to natural hazards such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis and wildfires?
To find answers, the National Science Foundation (NSF) recently awarded 12 new grants totaling $32 million through its Interdisciplinary Research in Hazards and Disasters solicitation. The effort is part of NSF's Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) investment.
Hazards SEES is funded by several NSF directorates: Geosciences; Engineering; Social, Economic and Behavioral Sciences; Mathematical and Physical Sciences; and Computer and Information Science and Engineering.
The awards will advance understanding of natural hazards and of technological hazards linked with natural phenomena. They will also improve capabilities for predicting these hazards, mitigating their effects and enhancing the capacity to respond to and recover from natural disasters.
Hazards SEES projects cross the boundaries of the atmospheric and geospace, earth and ocean sciences; computer and information science; cyberinfrastructure; engineering; mathematics and statistics; and social, economic and behavioral sciences.
"Through the Hazards SEES program, NSF has made investments in research that will reduce the impact of natural hazards, enhance safety, and contribute to sustainability," says Roger Wakimoto, NSF assistant director for Geosciences.
"When we face such impending disasters as Hurricane Sandy or the Oklahoma tornadoes, it's critical that we have already developed ways of responding to and recovering from such devastating events."
Hazards SEES scientists and engineers will conduct research on such topics as the integration of natural, human and infrastructure systems for hurricane evacuation and sheltering; volcanic crises in the United States: from precursors to resilience; next-generation warning systems for tornadoes and flash floods; and magnitude 9 earthquake scenarios: modeling, warnings and response and resilience in the Pacific Northwest.
Other projects include predicting landslide hazards; promoting regional resilience to repeated heat waves and hurricanes; preventing flood hazards from becoming disasters through communication of parcel-level flood risk; and developing monitoring, prediction and resilience cyberinfrastructure for wildfires.
"We hope to find new ways of 'beating the storm,'" says Wakimoto, "in whatever form it may arrive."
###
2013 Hazards SEES Awards
Hazards SEES Type 2: WIFIRE: A scalable data-driven monitoring, dynamic prediction and resilience cyberinfrastructure for wildfires: Ilkay Altintas, University of California San Diego
Additional Collaborators: Michael Gollner, University of Maryland College Park
Hazards SEES Type 1: End-to-end development of time-dependent geo-targeted alerts and warnings enabled by dense observations of the 2011 Tohoku tsunami: Jean-Paul Ampuero, California Institute of Technology
Additional Collaborators: Jeannette Sutton, U. of Colorado, Colorado Springs
Hazards SEES Type 2: From sensors to tweeters: A sustainable sociotechnical approach for detecting, mitigating, and building resilience to hazards: Louise Comfort, University of Pittsburgh
Hazards SEES Type 2: Dynamic integration of natural, human, and infrastructure systems for hurricane evacuation and sheltering: Rachel Davidson, University of Delaware
Additional Collaborators: Linda Nozick, Cornell University; Brian Colle, Stony Brook University/SUNY; Brian Blanton, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill; Randall Kolar, University of Oklahoma
Hazard SEES Type 1: Real-time geospatial infrastructure modeling for disaster response and rapid recovery: Craig Glennie, University of Houston
Hazards SEES Type 2: In hot water and harm's way: Modeling to promote regional resilience to repeated heat waves and hurricanes: Seth Guikema, Johns Hopkins University
Additional Collaborators: Celso Ferreira, George Mason University; Robin Dillon-Merrill, Georgetown University; Katie O'Meara, Maryland Institute College of Art; Margaret Walls, Resources for the Future Inc.
Hazards SEES Type 1: Persistent volcanic crises in the USA: From precursors to resilience: Bruce Houghton, University of Hawaii
Additional Collaborators: Robert Wolpert, Duke University; M. J. Bayarri, Marquette University; Michael Lindell, Texas A&M University; Greg Valentine, University of Buffalo; Michael Manga, University of California Berkeley
Hazards SEES Type 2: Hazard prediction and communication dynamics in the modern information environment: Rebecca Morss, National Center for Atmospheric Research
Additional Collaborators: C. Michael Barton, Arizona State University; Leysia Palen, University of Colorado Boulder
Hazard SEES Type 2: Next generation, resilient warning systems for tornadoes and flash floods: Brenda Philips, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Additional Collaborators: V. Chandrasekar, Colorado State University; Joseph Trainor, University of Delaware
Hazards SEES Type 2: Preventing flood hazards from becoming disasters through two-way communication of parcel-level flood risk: Brett Sanders, University of California Irvine
Additional Collaborators: Edmund Balsdon, San Diego State University; Kristen Goodrich, Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association
Hazards SEES Type 1: Predicting landslide runout and granular flow hazard: enhanced-g centrifuge experiments, contact dynamics model development and theoretical study: Colin Stark, Columbia University
Hazards SEES Type 2: Magnitude 9 earthquake scenarios--probabilistic modeling, warnings, response and resilience in the Pacific Northwest: John Vidale, University of Washington
-NSF-
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
In wake of Hurricane Sandy, Oklahoma tornadoes, NSF awards $32 million in hazards sustainability grants
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
21-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Cheryl Dybas cdybas@nsf.gov 703-292-7734 National Science Foundation
Scientists will study ways of predicting and responding to hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires
Sandy: the deadliest and most destructive hurricane of the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season and the second-costliest hurricane in U.S. history. Damage estimates from the storm surpass $68 billion, a total exceeded only by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
With Sandy's one-year anniversary--October 29th--on the horizon, how do scientists better predict and respond to natural hazards such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis and wildfires?
To find answers, the National Science Foundation (NSF) recently awarded 12 new grants totaling $32 million through its Interdisciplinary Research in Hazards and Disasters solicitation. The effort is part of NSF's Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) investment.
Hazards SEES is funded by several NSF directorates: Geosciences; Engineering; Social, Economic and Behavioral Sciences; Mathematical and Physical Sciences; and Computer and Information Science and Engineering.
The awards will advance understanding of natural hazards and of technological hazards linked with natural phenomena. They will also improve capabilities for predicting these hazards, mitigating their effects and enhancing the capacity to respond to and recover from natural disasters.
Hazards SEES projects cross the boundaries of the atmospheric and geospace, earth and ocean sciences; computer and information science; cyberinfrastructure; engineering; mathematics and statistics; and social, economic and behavioral sciences.
"Through the Hazards SEES program, NSF has made investments in research that will reduce the impact of natural hazards, enhance safety, and contribute to sustainability," says Roger Wakimoto, NSF assistant director for Geosciences.
"When we face such impending disasters as Hurricane Sandy or the Oklahoma tornadoes, it's critical that we have already developed ways of responding to and recovering from such devastating events."
Hazards SEES scientists and engineers will conduct research on such topics as the integration of natural, human and infrastructure systems for hurricane evacuation and sheltering; volcanic crises in the United States: from precursors to resilience; next-generation warning systems for tornadoes and flash floods; and magnitude 9 earthquake scenarios: modeling, warnings and response and resilience in the Pacific Northwest.
Other projects include predicting landslide hazards; promoting regional resilience to repeated heat waves and hurricanes; preventing flood hazards from becoming disasters through communication of parcel-level flood risk; and developing monitoring, prediction and resilience cyberinfrastructure for wildfires.
"We hope to find new ways of 'beating the storm,'" says Wakimoto, "in whatever form it may arrive."
###
2013 Hazards SEES Awards
Hazards SEES Type 2: WIFIRE: A scalable data-driven monitoring, dynamic prediction and resilience cyberinfrastructure for wildfires: Ilkay Altintas, University of California San Diego
Additional Collaborators: Michael Gollner, University of Maryland College Park
Hazards SEES Type 1: End-to-end development of time-dependent geo-targeted alerts and warnings enabled by dense observations of the 2011 Tohoku tsunami: Jean-Paul Ampuero, California Institute of Technology
Additional Collaborators: Jeannette Sutton, U. of Colorado, Colorado Springs
Hazards SEES Type 2: From sensors to tweeters: A sustainable sociotechnical approach for detecting, mitigating, and building resilience to hazards: Louise Comfort, University of Pittsburgh
Hazards SEES Type 2: Dynamic integration of natural, human, and infrastructure systems for hurricane evacuation and sheltering: Rachel Davidson, University of Delaware
Additional Collaborators: Linda Nozick, Cornell University; Brian Colle, Stony Brook University/SUNY; Brian Blanton, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill; Randall Kolar, University of Oklahoma
Hazard SEES Type 1: Real-time geospatial infrastructure modeling for disaster response and rapid recovery: Craig Glennie, University of Houston
Hazards SEES Type 2: In hot water and harm's way: Modeling to promote regional resilience to repeated heat waves and hurricanes: Seth Guikema, Johns Hopkins University
Additional Collaborators: Celso Ferreira, George Mason University; Robin Dillon-Merrill, Georgetown University; Katie O'Meara, Maryland Institute College of Art; Margaret Walls, Resources for the Future Inc.
Hazards SEES Type 1: Persistent volcanic crises in the USA: From precursors to resilience: Bruce Houghton, University of Hawaii
Additional Collaborators: Robert Wolpert, Duke University; M. J. Bayarri, Marquette University; Michael Lindell, Texas A&M University; Greg Valentine, University of Buffalo; Michael Manga, University of California Berkeley
Hazards SEES Type 2: Hazard prediction and communication dynamics in the modern information environment: Rebecca Morss, National Center for Atmospheric Research
Additional Collaborators: C. Michael Barton, Arizona State University; Leysia Palen, University of Colorado Boulder
Hazard SEES Type 2: Next generation, resilient warning systems for tornadoes and flash floods: Brenda Philips, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Additional Collaborators: V. Chandrasekar, Colorado State University; Joseph Trainor, University of Delaware
Hazards SEES Type 2: Preventing flood hazards from becoming disasters through two-way communication of parcel-level flood risk: Brett Sanders, University of California Irvine
Additional Collaborators: Edmund Balsdon, San Diego State University; Kristen Goodrich, Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association
Hazards SEES Type 1: Predicting landslide runout and granular flow hazard: enhanced-g centrifuge experiments, contact dynamics model development and theoretical study: Colin Stark, Columbia University
Hazards SEES Type 2: Magnitude 9 earthquake scenarios--probabilistic modeling, warnings, response and resilience in the Pacific Northwest: John Vidale, University of Washington
-NSF-
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Using 140 HTC One smartphones and a few breakdancing, fire-breathing passersby who just happened to include a perfectly trained dog and totally weren't actors, Qualcomm showed off everything its crazy fast Snapdragon processors can do with a 540-degree Ultimate Smartphone Photo Booth.
I walked into today’s Apple event positive that the iPad mini with a retina display, if unveiled, would be the one iPad to rule them all. I was sure that such a device would so thoroughly upstage the 9.7-inch iPad, that there would be no shortage of folks wondering why the larger sibling even continued to exist. And actually, that proved to be prescient. Apple no longer sells the device simply called “iPad”.
Enter iPad Air. The new heir apparent to the iPad throne.
When you hear about the upgraded dimensions of the iPad Air, you’re undoubtedly impressed. 28 percent lighter. 20 percent thinner. 1 pound. 1 freaking pound! But it’s not until you actually hold the device until what Apple has done here really registers.
I got the chance to play around with the iPad Air for roughly 20 minutes today after the event. When I first held it, it reminded me of the first time I held an iPhone 4 — or perhaps more appropriately, a MacBook Air. It’s an immediate and visceral “whoa”.
As someone who still regularly uses a larger iPad (technically, the “iPad 4″), it just doesn’t seem possible that a company could pull off such an upgrade from one generation to the next. I’m not sure it even seems possible to perform such an upgrade at all just based on the laws of science. I mean, not only is this iPad Air absurdly thinner and lighter, it actually boasts hugely upgraded internals as well. It’s just silly.
Holding the iPad Air actually feels closer to holding an iPad mini than to the regular-sized iPad. And it is closer. The iPad 4 weighed 650 grams. The (last generation) iPad mini weighed 308 grams. The iPad Air weighs 469 grams. But the other key in the device feeling more like an iPad mini is that it’s not only significantly thinner, but also smaller, thanks to Apple reducing the bezels on the side of the iPad Air.
This takes a device that was 7.31-inches down to 6.6-inches while maintaining the same screen size. That’s a huge reduction that’s actually very meaningful when you’re holding it in your hand.
And that’s another key: the biggest problem myself and many others had with the original iPad is that it was hard to hold it with one hand for any extended period of time. This issue became even more pronounced when the iPad mini came onto the scene. But thanks to the size and weight reductions found on the iPad Air, this is finally a comfortable one-handed device.
So, an iPad that’s insanely thinner and lighter while getting huge spec upgrades and maintaining the large screen size. It’s a device that’s ”meant to be taken places. Handled. And really used,” as Jony Ive described it in his video introduction of the iPad Air. This must be the new king of the iPads, right?
Not so fast.
Here’s the strangest thing to me about today’s unveilings: while the iPad Air perfected and upgraded the larger iPad in every way, the iPad mini got spec upgrades that are nearly unfathomable. How unfathomable? The iPad mini now seemingly has the exact same internals as this new iPad Air.
Think about that for a minute.
The iPad mini was previously running on an A5 chip. This new one has the just-unveiled-in-the-iPhone-5s top-of-the-line A7 chip. Yes, it skipped a generation.
Apple could have easily gave the iPad mini an A6 chip and everyone would have been happy. “Want an iPad running the A7? Try the top-of-the-line iPad Air.” That could have been a perfectly reasonable message. It would have still been a big upgrade for the iPad mini and presumably would have saved Apple quite a bit of cost. But Apple didn’t do that.
“We want everyone to have access to all our best features,” is what Tim Cook said when referring to Apple’s other massive move today: making all their software — including OS X — free. But he could have just as easily been talking about these new iPads.
Buying an iPad mini is in no way a step down from buying an iPad Air. It’s simply a smaller device with a slightly smaller price. Chips. Graphics. Screen. Battery life. Storage space. They’re all now exactly the same on both devices. It’s really just a matter of preference.
But for many of us, this is now an extremely hard choice — much harder than I thought it would be. I had thought the retina display on a slower iPad mini would trump the faster performance of the iPad with a 9.7-inch screen. Instead, we have a retina display on an iPad mini that has the same performance as a ridiculously svelte iPad with a 9.7-inch screen.
First world problem? Yes. Maybe now the quintessential first world problem. I’m torn. And I won’t be the only one.
When I briefly ran into Tim Cook after the event and brought up this issue, he laughed, noting that I had another option: I could buy both.
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — With a new trial ordered for Michael Skakel, a defense lawyer for the Kennedy cousin serving time in the 1975 slaying of a neighbor said he will seek his release from prison on bond.
Skakel's conviction was set aside Wednesday by a Connecticut judge, Thomas Bishop, who ruled that Skakel's trial attorney failed to adequately represent him when he was found guilty in 2002. Bridgeport State's Attorney John Smriga said prosecutors will appeal the decision.
Skakel's current attorney, Hubert Santos, said he expects to file a motion for bail on Thursday. If a judge approves it, Skakel could then post bond and be released from prison.
"We're very, very thrilled," Santos said. "I always felt that Michael was innocent."
Skakel argued his trial attorney, Michael Sherman, was negligent in defending him when he was convicted in the golf club bludgeoning of Martha Moxley when they were 15 in wealthy Greenwich.
Prosecutors contended Sherman's efforts far exceeded standards and that the verdict was based on compelling evidence against Skakel.
John Moxley, the victim's brother, said the ruling took him and his family by surprise and they hope the state wins an appeal.
"Having been in the courtroom during the trial, there were a lot of things that Mickey Sherman did very cleverly," Moxley said about Skakel's trial lawyer. "But the evidence was against him. And when the evidence is against you, there's almost nothing you can do."
In his ruling, the judge wrote that defense in such a case requires attention to detail, an energetic investigation and a coherent plan of defense.
"Trial counsel's failures in each of these areas of representation were significant and, ultimately, fatal to a constitutionally adequate defense," Thomas wrote. "As a consequence of trial counsel's failures as stated, the state procured a judgment of conviction that lacks reliability."
Among other issues, the judge wrote that the defense could have focused more on Skakel's brother, Thomas, who was an early suspect in the case because he was the last person seen with Moxley. Had Sherman done so, "there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different," the judge wrote.
During a state trial in April on the appeal, Skakel took the stand and blasted Sherman's handling of the case, portraying him as an overly confident lawyer having fun and basking in the limelight while making fundamental mistakes from poor jury picks to failing to track down key witnesses.
Sherman has said he did all he could to prevent Skakel's conviction and denied he was distracted by media attention in the high-profile case.
Prosecutors said Sherman spent thousands of hours preparing the defense, challenged the state on large and small legal issues, consulted experts and was assisted by some of the state's top lawyers. Sherman attacked the state's evidence, presented an alibi and pointed the finger at an earlier suspect, prosecutors said.
"This strategy failed not because of any fault of Sherman's, but because of the strength of the state's case," prosecutor Susann Gill wrote in court papers.
Skakel, who maintains his innocence, was denied parole last year and was told he would not be eligible again to be considered for release for five years.
WASHINGTON (AP) — So how do U.S. eighth-graders do in math and science when compared to their peers around the globe? Turns out it matters which state they live in, according to a study being released Thursday.
Massachusetts was the top performing state, but it still lagged behind some Asian countries in terms of its students' overall score on exams and the number of high achievers.
Mississippi, Alabama and the District of Columbia students scored below the international average on both exams, meaning their scores were on par with Kazakhstan and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
West Virginia, Oklahoma and Tennessee students scored below the international average in math.
Jack Buckley, commissioner of the Education Department's National Center for Education Statistics, which released the study, called the results a "good-news, bad-news scenario" that probably will bolster both those who say the U.S. is doing fine in global competitiveness as well as those on the other side.
Overall, a majority of states performed above the international average in both subjects.
"Our states really are scattered across the performance levels," Buckley said in a conference call with reporters.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a statement that the study provides "powerful confirmation that demography need not be destiny when it comes to school performance — state policies matter too."
The study compared every state, the District of Columbia and Defense Department schools against 38 countries and nine additional subnational education systems. Some countries, including China, India, France and Germany, did not participate.
Researchers took eighth-grade test results in math and science from the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) to predict performance on the international comparative study test known as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Nine states participated directly in TIMSS.
NAEP includes the scores of students tested with accommodations; TIMSS does not. Buckley said statistical modeling was used to account for that difference.
South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Japan were the top scorers in math followed by Massachusetts, Vermont, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Hampshire.
In science, Massachusetts was behind the top scorer, Singapore. Taiwan was next, followed by Vermont. The top 10 also included South Korea and Japan — and New Hampshire, North Dakota, Maine and Minnesota.
Mark Schneider, vice president at the American Institutes for Research and a former commissioner for the National Center for Education Statistics, said one of the most disturbing results from the study is the low numbers of "advanced" achievers in the United States compared with other countries.
Even in high-scoring Massachusetts, where 19 percent of students reached the "advanced benchmark" in math and 24 reached it in science, there were fewer higher achievers than in some other countries. About half the students in Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore reached the high benchmark in math and 40 percent of students in Singapore did so.
On the other end, for example, Alabama had a lower percent of "advanced" achievers in math than Romania and Turkey — two countries it overall scored higher than.
"In a world in which we need the best, it's pretty clear many states are empty on the best," Schneider said.
Tom Loveless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said one thing that's hidden in the results of this study is that even in high-achieving states, there are low performers who need to be brought up from the bottom.
"If we as Americans want to get all of our kids achieving at the highest level, in terms of worldwide academic achievement, we have a lot of work and it's not just the low scoring states where it's obvious," Loveless said.
The scores were ranked on a scale of 1,000.
In math, the average state scores ranged from 561 for Massachusetts to 466 for Alabama.
In science, the average state scores ranged from 567 for Massachusetts to 453 for the District of Columbia.
NASA successfully landed six moon missions from 1969 to 1972 — and had one legendary failure. It was a monumental era for NASA, and thanks to bonkers YouTube user lunarmodule5, now you can ride along on a space video mashup of all six heart-pounding landings at once. It's breathtaking.
Use Dragon NaturallySpeaking to create documents and control common PC programs.
Put your laptop in sleep mode when you’re in transit.
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](http://www.eurekalert.org/images/back2e.gif){kind=small}
Share
