Podcasts about Gratz

Just how prevalent is self-injury among older adults, specifically those ages 60 and over?  Do the types and methods they use differ from those who self-injure at other ages? What about the reasons they give for self-injuring? In this episode, Dr. Lisa Van Hove from Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Brussels University) is the first to reveal the prevalence of self-injury and self-harm among older adults.To see Dr. Van Hove's publications, including those about self-injury among older adults, click here. Connect with Dr. Van Hove on LinkedIn here. Below is some of her research and that of others referenced in this episode:Van Hove, L., Baetens, I., Hamza, C., Dierckx, E., Haekens, A., Fieremans, L., & Vanderstichelen, S. (2023). NSSI in older adults. In E.E. Lloyd-Richardson, I. Baetens, & J. Whitlock (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of nonsuicidal self-injury (pp. 572-592). Oxford University Press.Van Hove, L., Baetens, I., & Vanderstichelen, S. (2025). Psychogeriatric experts' experiences with risk factors of suicidal and non-suicidal self-injury in older adults: A qualitative study. Qualitative Research in Medicine and Healthcare, 8(1). Van Hove, L., Baetens, I., & Vanderstichelen, S. (2024). Conceptualizing self-harm through the experiences of psychogeriatric experts. Psychopathology, 57(4), 277-285.Van Hove, L., Nieuwenhuijs, B. M., Vanderstichelen, S., De Witte, N., Gorus, E., Stas, L., & Baetens, I. (2025). Biopsychosocial profile of community-dwelling older adults at risk for direct and indirect self-harm. Clinical Gerontologist, 1–12.Van Hove, L., Facon M., Baetens, I., Vanderstichelen, S., Dierckx, E., Van Alphen, S.P.J., Stas, L., & Rossi, G. (in press). Development of an at-risk personality profile for (in)direct self-harm engagement in older age. Journal of Personality Disorders.Murphy, E., Kapur, N., Webb, R., Purandare, N., Hawton, K., Bergen, H., Waters, K., & Cooper, J. (2012). Risk factors for repetition and suicide following self-harm in older adults: multicentre cohort study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 200(5), 399-404.Martin, G., & Swannell, S. (2016). Non-suicidal self-injury in the over 40s: Results from a large national epidemiological survey. Epidemiology (Sunnyvale), 6(5), 266.Choi, N. G., DiNitto, D. M., Marti, C. N., & Choi, B. Y. (2016). Nonsuicidal self-injury and suicide attempts among ED patients older than 50 years: comparison of risk factors and ED visit outcomes. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 34(6), 1016-1021.Ose, S. O., Tveit, T., & Mehlum, L. (2021). Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) in adult psychiatric outpatients – A nationwide study. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 133, 1-9.Wiktorsson, S., Strömsten, L., Renberg, E. S., Runeson, B., & Waern, M. (2022). Clinical characteristics in older, middle-aged and young adults who present with suicide attempts at psychiatric emergency departments: A multisite study. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 30(3), 342-351.Gratz, K. L., & Tull, M. T. (2025). Acceptance-based emotion regulation therapy: A clinician's guide to treating emotion dysregulation & self-destructive behaviors using an evidence-based therapy drawn from ACT & DBT. Context Press.Want to have a bigger role on the podcast?:Should you or someone you know be interviewed on the podcast? We want to know! Please fill out this Google doc form, and we will be in touch with more details if it's a good fit.Want to hear your question and have it answered on the podcast? Please send an audio clip of your question (60 seconds or less) to @DocWesters on Instagram or Twitter/X, or email us at thepsychologyofselfinjury@gmail.comWant to be involved in research? Send us a message at thepsychologyofselfinjury@gmail.com and we will see if we can match you to an active study.Want to interact with us through comments and polls? You can on Spotify!Follow Dr. Westers on Instagram and Twitter/X (@DocWesters). To join ISSS, visit itriples.org and follow ISSS on Facebook and Twitter/X (@ITripleS).The Psychology of Self-Injury podcast has been rated as one of the "10 Best Self Harm Podcasts" and "20 Best Clinical Psychology Podcasts" by Feedspot  and one of the Top 100 Psychology Podcasts by Goodpods. It has also been featured in Audible's "Best Mental Health Podcasts to Defy Stigma and Begin to Heal."

What does it take to go from family auctions to becoming a NAR 30 Under 30 real estate star? In this episode, Logan Gratz is here to uncover his journey from growing up in an auctioneering family to building a thriving real estate business. Logan shares how relationship-building, community involvement, and leveraging family expertise helped him earn trust early on. He dives into team dynamics, buyer behavior, open houses, development challenges, and the keys to navigating inspections and appraisals. If you want real-world strategies from one of the industry's rising stars, this episode is a must-listen! Tune in now! Related Links and Resources: Follow Logan Gratz on Instagram Follow Logan Gratz on Facebook Follow Call Gratz on Instagram Check out the Call Gratz Website Follow Sara Denig on Instagram Follow Christina Leavenworth on Instagram Follow Aaron Amuchastegui on Instagram Get Hundreds of FREE Real Estate Tools From the Toolbox

If you're in the Pilates world, you've likely heard of Gratz Pilates—the gold standard for classical Pilates equipment. But what happens when someone from the tech and gaming industry takes the reins of this iconic brand?In this special guest episode of The Pilates Business Podcast, host Seran Glanfield welcomes John Riccitello, co-owner of Gratz Pilates, who, along with his wife Elizabeth, purchased the company in 2023. But this wasn't just a business acquisition—it was personal.John shares his incredible journey of discovering classical Pilates after a major injury, how it transformed his life, and why he and Elizabeth stepped in to ensure Gratz continues to thrive. From reducing equipment wait times to expanding customer support, John gives us an inside look at the exciting changes happening at Gratz and what's next for the company.Tune in to hear:John's personal Pilates journey and how it led to owning Gratz PilatesThe challenges and innovations behind running a legacy Pilates brandHow Gratz is improving craftsmanship, delivery times, and global availabilityWhat studio owners need to consider when investing in equipmentIf you're a studio owner or passionate about classical Pilates, this episode is a must-listen!Got a question for Seran? Add it here

Recap of Battle for Ohio. Gratz to the Ebon Fist.

Dans cet extrait, Aurélie nous raconte leur découverte de la région de la Carinthie où se trouvent de nombreux lacs d'eau chaude, la belle ville de Gratz et l'incontournable Vienne sur les pas de Sissy, dont Lola est fan.Pour écouter l'épisode en entierRoad trip en famille en Autriche------------Création et hôte : Stéphanie CordierMusique : Luk & Jo

Vous vous souvenez d'Aurélie ?Mais si, elle nous a raconté son superbe road trip en Sicile dans l'épisode 105. Elle nous avait dit à quel point elle aimait les voyages depuis toujours et comment elle avait transmis le virus à Damien, son mari et à leurs trois enfants : Lola, Matéo et le petit dernier Nino.Cette fois, Aurélie nous amène en Autriche avec sa famille, et plus particulièrement au cœur de ses montagnes verdoyantes et de ses lacs majestueux. Les enfants avaient alors 10 ans, 7 ans et 2 mois ! Lors de ce road trip estival de près de 3 semaines, ils ont parcouru le Tyrol, Zell am See, la Carinthie et ses lacs d'eau… chaude, Gratz, Vienne évidemment, la vallée du Danube, les alentours du lac Traunsee, et enfin Salzburg.Vous allez voir que l'Autriche, c'est loin de n'être que Vienne, et que ça a l'air assez fou l'été !Allez, c'est parti pour le carnet de voyage d'Aurélie en Autriche !------------Création et hôte : Stéphanie CordierMusique : Luk & Jo

Wir sprechen (erneut, vgl. Ars boni #316) mit Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Gratz:. Er ist Jurist und Soziologe, Sprecher und Gründer der Initiative "Bessere Verwaltung". Wir sprechen über Defizite und Chancen in der österreichischen Verwaltung und ihrem Recht, insb. im Lichte der laufenden Diskussionen um Verwaltungsreform und Digitalisierung. Links: https://www.wolfgang-gratz.at/Startse... https://bessereverwaltung.at/ Ars Boni #316: https://www.youtube.com/live/I2wj8D80GHU?t=0s

In this episode of The Full Arch Podcast, host Dr. Steven Vorholt sits with Dr. Cliff Gratz to explore Neodent's journey in full-arch implants. From its origins to its latest innovations, this episode dives deep into how Neodent revolutionizes workflows and outcomes in full-arch dentistry.     Key Highlights: Neodent's Evolution: Discover how Neodent grew from its early beginnings to becoming a leader in full-arch implant solutions, offering dentists accessible and reliable tools. Innovative Solutions for Full-Arch Cases: Cliff highlights advancements like shorter implants and the Neo Convert system, designed to simplify workflows and enhance treatment outcomes. Looking Ahead: Gain insights into the future of full-arch dentistry, with technology-driven solutions and patient-centric approaches leading the charge.    

Serial Killer Jack Unterweger was a local fascination and dangerous media darling in Austria. He killed a prostitute in Gratz and went to prison for 16 years. While inside, he learned to read and write and began writing novellas and poems. His work was so impressive that scholars and critics began to lobby for his release, claiming he had been changed by the power of art. Jack was released and then, prostitutes began dying in the area. Jack was then hired by an Austrian magazine to fly to America and write a story on crime in Los Angeles. He checked into the infamous Hotel Cecil and then, Los Angeles cops began finding dead prostitutes on Skid Row. Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/dark-hearts-with-stacy-lee-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Send us a textThe Pilates apparatus company, Gratz Industries, Inc., has 2 new co-owners. John Riccitiello & Elizabeth Osterman. Both classical Pilates lovers, John and Elizabeth have a combined skill set that this 100+ year artisan company has fully embraced. Now at the helm, this power couple has their sights on redefining the newly named, Gratz Pilates to its rightful place at the top of the classical Pilates apparatus industry.  About Darien Gold ~ https://www.dariengold.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/darien_gold_pilates_expertFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/dariengoldMusic credits ~ Instagram: @theotherjohnmayer About Gratz Pilates ~ https://www.pilates-gratz.com, John@gratzpilates.com, Elizabeth@gratzpilates.comSupport the show

The mother of Elijah Vue, Katrina Baur, is grappling with heartbreak after her son's remains were identified. In a statement released through her attorney, Amber Gratz, Baur expressed her devastation upon learning the news. “Katrina Baur is devastated by the most recent news, identifying the remains found as Elijah. She had continued to have hope that her little boy would be found alive. At this time, she is mourning the loss of her son,” Gratz stated in an email to Action 2 News. The Two Rivers Police confirmed last week that the human remains found on private property belonged to the missing child, Elijah Vue. The discovery was made by a hunter who was preparing his land for the upcoming hunting season. The remains were located approximately three miles northwest of where Elijah was originally reported missing. Baur remains in custody, facing serious charges of child neglect, which includes accusations of abusing Elijah. Her boyfriend, Jesse Vang, reported Elijah missing on February 20 while the boy was in his care. A criminal complaint indicates that Elijah was with Vang as a disciplinary measure for “bad behavior.” Baur, originally from Wisconsin Dells, allegedly wanted Vang to teach her 3-year-old son “to be a man.” Both Baur and Vang have pleaded not guilty to felony child neglect charges. In addition to these allegations, Baur faces a charge of obstructing police. Their cases are currently progressing through the judicial system. Baur has made several attempts to have her bond reduced; however, those requests have been denied. Last month, a judge did modify her bond to allow for supervised contact with her children, which highlights ongoing concerns about the family's situation. The tragic discovery of Elijah's remains has left the community and family reeling, and Baur's upcoming court appearance in October will be closely monitored as the legal proceedings continue. The investigation surrounding Elijah Vue's case remains active, with the community seeking answers and justice for the young boy. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The mother of Elijah Vue, Katrina Baur, is grappling with heartbreak after her son's remains were identified. In a statement released through her attorney, Amber Gratz, Baur expressed her devastation upon learning the news. “Katrina Baur is devastated by the most recent news, identifying the remains found as Elijah. She had continued to have hope that her little boy would be found alive. At this time, she is mourning the loss of her son,” Gratz stated in an email to Action 2 News. The Two Rivers Police confirmed last week that the human remains found on private property belonged to the missing child, Elijah Vue. The discovery was made by a hunter who was preparing his land for the upcoming hunting season. The remains were located approximately three miles northwest of where Elijah was originally reported missing. Baur remains in custody, facing serious charges of child neglect, which includes accusations of abusing Elijah. Her boyfriend, Jesse Vang, reported Elijah missing on February 20 while the boy was in his care. A criminal complaint indicates that Elijah was with Vang as a disciplinary measure for “bad behavior.” Baur, originally from Wisconsin Dells, allegedly wanted Vang to teach her 3-year-old son “to be a man.” Both Baur and Vang have pleaded not guilty to felony child neglect charges. In addition to these allegations, Baur faces a charge of obstructing police. Their cases are currently progressing through the judicial system. Baur has made several attempts to have her bond reduced; however, those requests have been denied. Last month, a judge did modify her bond to allow for supervised contact with her children, which highlights ongoing concerns about the family's situation. The tragic discovery of Elijah's remains has left the community and family reeling, and Baur's upcoming court appearance in October will be closely monitored as the legal proceedings continue. The investigation surrounding Elijah Vue's case remains active, with the community seeking answers and justice for the young boy. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The mother of Elijah Vue, Katrina Baur, is grappling with heartbreak after her son's remains were identified. In a statement released through her attorney, Amber Gratz, Baur expressed her devastation upon learning the news. “Katrina Baur is devastated by the most recent news, identifying the remains found as Elijah. She had continued to have hope that her little boy would be found alive. At this time, she is mourning the loss of her son,” Gratz stated in an email to Action 2 News. The Two Rivers Police confirmed last week that the human remains found on private property belonged to the missing child, Elijah Vue. The discovery was made by a hunter who was preparing his land for the upcoming hunting season. The remains were located approximately three miles northwest of where Elijah was originally reported missing. Baur remains in custody, facing serious charges of child neglect, which includes accusations of abusing Elijah. Her boyfriend, Jesse Vang, reported Elijah missing on February 20 while the boy was in his care. A criminal complaint indicates that Elijah was with Vang as a disciplinary measure for “bad behavior.” Baur, originally from Wisconsin Dells, allegedly wanted Vang to teach her 3-year-old son “to be a man.” Both Baur and Vang have pleaded not guilty to felony child neglect charges. In addition to these allegations, Baur faces a charge of obstructing police. Their cases are currently progressing through the judicial system. Baur has made several attempts to have her bond reduced; however, those requests have been denied. Last month, a judge did modify her bond to allow for supervised contact with her children, which highlights ongoing concerns about the family's situation. The tragic discovery of Elijah's remains has left the community and family reeling, and Baur's upcoming court appearance in October will be closely monitored as the legal proceedings continue. The investigation surrounding Elijah Vue's case remains active, with the community seeking answers and justice for the young boy. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

Emotion Regulation Individual Therapy for Adolescents (ERITA) and its internet-delivered version (IERITA) is just one of a couple of treatments developed specifically to address nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) among adolescents. In this episode, Dr. Johan Bjureberg from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden walks us through in detail each of the 11 sessions of IERITA and IERITA's 6 parallel sessions for parents.Learn more about Dr. Bjureberg's work here, and follow the Bjureberg Research Lab and their projects and publications at https://bjureberglab.se/. Below are links to his research on ERITA/IERITA referenced in this episode:Bjureberg, J., Ojala, O., Hesser, H., Häbel, H., Sahlin, H., Gratz, K. L., Tull, M. T., Knutsson, E. C., Hedman-Lagerlöf, E., Ljótsson, B., & Hellner, C. (2023). Effect of internet-delivered Emotion Regulation Individual Therapy for Adolescents with Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Disorder: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Network Open, 6(7), e2322069.Bjureberg, J., Sahlin, H., Hedman-Lagerlof, E., Gratz, K. L., Tull, M. T., Jokinen, J., Hellner, C., & Ljotsson, B. (2018). Extending research on emotion regulation individual therapy for adolescents (ERITA) with nonsuicidal self-injury disorder: Open pilot trial and mediation analysis of a novel online version. BMC Psychiatry, 18, 326.Bjureberg, J., Sahlin, H., Hellner, C., Hedman-Lagerlof, E., Gratz, K. L., Bjarehed, J., Jokinen, J., Tull, M. T., & Ljotsson, B. (2017). Emotion regulation individual therapy for adolescents with nonsuicidal self-injury disorder: A feasibility study. BMC Psychiatry, 17, 411.Want to have a bigger role on the podcast?:Should you or someone you know be interviewed on the podcast? We want to know! Please fill out this Google doc form, and we will be in touch with more details if it's a good fit.Want to hear your question and have it answered on the podcast? Please send an audio clip of your question (60 seconds or less) to @DocWesters on Instagram or Twitter/X, or email us at thepsychologyofselfinjury@gmail.comWant to be involved in research? Send us a message at thepsychologyofselfinjury@gmail.com and we will see if we can match you to an active study.Want to interact with us through comments and polls? You can on Spotify!Follow Dr. Westers on Instagram and Twitter/X (@DocWesters). To join ISSS, visit itriples.org and follow ISSS on Facebook and Twitter/X (@ITripleS).The Psychology of Self-Injury podcast has been rated as one of the "10 Best Self Harm Podcasts" and "20 Best Clinical Psychology Podcasts" by Feedspot  and one of the Top 100 Psychology Podcasts by Goodpods. It has also been featured in Audible's "Best Mental Health Podcasts to Defy Stigma and Begin to Heal." Goodpods Top 100 Parents Podcasts Listen now to The Psychology of Self-Injury: ExploringSelf-Harm & Mental Health podcast Goodpods Top 100 Research Podcasts Listen now to The Psychology of Self-Injury: ExploringSelf-Harm & Mental Health podcast 

Helen E. Horn was the 68-year-old widow of Dr. Arthur Horn of Gratz, PA. Helen was involved with many organizations including the Gratz Historical Society. She also found great joy in taking care of her 15 cats. So how does someone who did so much for their community fall victim to a senseless murder?

on a visit to Munich before leaving for Transylvania. It is Walpurgis Night, and despite the hotelier's warning not to return late, the young man later leaves his carriage and wanders toward the direction of an abandoned "unholy" village. As the carriage departs with the frightened and superstitious driver, a tall and thin stranger scares the horses at the crest of a hill.After a few hours, as he reaches a desolate valley, it begins to snow; as a dark storm gathers intensity, the Englishman takes shelter in a grove of cypress and yew trees. The Englishman's location is soon illuminated by moonlight to be a cemetery, and he finds himself before a marble tomb with a large iron stake driven through the roof, the inscription reads: "Countess Dolingen of Gratz / in Styria / sought and found death / 1801". The Englishman is disturbed to be in such a place on such a night, and as the storm breaks anew, he is forced by pelting hail to shelter in the tomb's doorway. As he does so, the bronze door of the tomb opens under his weight and a flash of forked lightning shows the interior, revealing a "beautiful woman with rounded cheeks and red lips, seemingly sleeping on a bier". The force of the following thunder peal throws the Englishman from the doorway (experienced as "being grasped as by the hand of a giant") as another lightning bolt strikes the iron spike, destroying the tomb and the now screaming woman inside.The Englishman's troubles are not quite over. As he painfully regains his senses from the ordeal, he is repulsed by a feeling of loathing, which he connects to a warm feeling in his chest and licking at his throat. The Englishman summons the courage to peek through his eyelashes and discovers a gigantic wolf with flaming eyes is attending him.Military horsemen are the next to wake the semi-conscious man, chasing the wolf away with torches and guns. Some horsemen return to the main party and the Englishman after the chase, reporting that they had not found 'him' and that the Englishman's animal is "a wolf—and yet not a wolf". They also note that blood is on the ruined tomb, yet the Englishman's neck is unblooded. "See comrades, the wolf has been lying on him and keeping his blood warm". Later, the Englishman finds his neck pained when a horseman comments.When the Englishman is taken back to his hotel by the men, he is informed that it is none other than his expectant host Count Dracula who has alerted the Maître d'hôtel of "dangers from snow and wolves and night" in a telegram during the time the Englishman was away. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/audiblyaudiobooks/support

Thomas ist Gründer und ehemaliger CEO von Dataformers Software Engineering. Ein Vollbluttechnologe und Softwareentwickler. Seine Anteile hat er verkauft und hat nun eine neue Mission und ein neues Unternehmen: Tomkern Luxury Smart Home. Der Elektriker von morgen, der zu Reparaturarbeiten nicht mehr mit dem Werkzeugkoffer, sondern mit seinem Laptop erscheint. Ich spreche mit Tom über die rasanten Entwicklungen im Smart Home-Bereich, der Photovoltaikbranche, warum er über 800 Stunden in die Entwicklung seiner eigenen Smart Home Technologie investiert hat und warum sein neues Unternehmen eine reines IT-Unternehmen ist. Nebst vielen interessanten Geschichten erzählt Tom natürlich auch die Gründungsstory von Dataformers, die im Grunde in einem Einkaufszentrum in der Nähe von Linz entstanden ist. Plus: Warum er einen Stromausfall in seinem Wohnort nicht mitbekommen hat.  www.tomkern.art

Kevin Nance is a photographer, arts journalist and poet living in Lexington, Kentucky. His photographs have been shown in solo and group exhibitions in Chicago, Portland, Danville and Lexington, including at the Lexington Art League, the Lexington Public Library, the University of Kentucky Hospital and Arts Connect's Mobile Gallery. His two collections of photographs and haiku are Even If (University of Kentucky Arts in HealthCare, 2020) and Midnight (Act of Power Press, 2022). As a journalist, Kevin's work has appeared in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times, Poets & Writers Magazine, the Lexington Herald-Leader, Ace Magazine, UnderMain and many other publications.​He's the host of Out & About in Kentucky with Kevin Nance and a co-host of the Kentucky Writers' Roundtable, both on RadioLex.

Lainie Gratz, Owner of Lainie Multimedia Design, joined Kyle Miller live on The Kyle Miller Show! The Kyle Miller Show airs live Thursday from 2:15 pm – 3 pm on The I Love CVille Network. Watch and listen to The Kyle Miller Show on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, iTunes, Apple Podcast, YouTube, Spotify, Fountain, Amazon Music, Audible and iLoveCVille.com.

Today's episode features: Rebecca Gratz, Nurse, Philanthropist, and Educator Sponsored by ⁠⁠⁠2 Complicated 4 History⁠⁠⁠ Produced by ⁠Primary Source Media⁠

@schwarzenegger aka Arnold aka the Terminator aka the Governor is iconic. His accomplishments are profound but also strategic and conceptually induced. To go from a young boy in Austria, Gratz who found working out as a way to escape the realities of post-WW2 Germany to being the GOAT of Bodybuilding, to then being a movie star and later governor of California takes real vision and real execution. How did he do it? Did all that benching help? His book - Be Useful - has been a game changer and I want to review it in conjunction with the faith and Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is PART 2 of this book review, covering chapters 4 -7. Instagram@cvmk_globalInstagram @cvmk33 www.cvmkglobal.storeUse code -CVMK - at checkout for 20%Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp9pMDsdhRpe42b1dRTWFzA/join --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cv-k/message

@schwarzenegger aka Arnold aka the Terminator aka the Governor is iconic. His accomplishments are profound but also strategic and conceptually induced. To go from a young boy in Austria, Gratz who found working out as a way to escape the realities of post-WW2 Germany to being the GOAT of Bodybuilding, to then being a movie star and later governor of California takes real vision and real execution. How did he do it? Did all that benching help? His book - Be Useful - has been a game changer and I want to review it in conjunction with the faith and Gospel of Jesus Christ. Enjoy this amazing episode as I unpack the first three chapters of the book. Instagram@cvmk_globalInstagram @cvmk33 www.cvmkglobal.storeUse code -CVMK - at checkout for 20% https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp9pMDsdhRpe42b1dRTWFzA/join --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/cv-k/message

This week we return to one of of favorite (and most important topics): training others to work with adults with significant disabilities. And, in our excitement to talk to Dr. John Guercio on everything this entails, we almost forgot to talk about the specific articles! Whether looking at the primary means of supporting staff skill growth or utilizing effective, evidence-based treatment plans and curricula, we leave no stone unturned in learning everything we can about supporting adult clients (within the timeframe of our podcast length). Want to see more? Check out Dr. Guercio's core competencies book for more. This episode is available for 1.0 LEARNING CEU. Articles discussed this episode: Wilson, A.N., Kasson, E.M., Gratz, O., & Guercio, J.M. (2015). Exploring the clinical utility of a stimulus avoidance assessment to enhance a relaxation training model. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8, 57-61. doi: 10.1007/s40617-014-0035-y Guercio, J., Davis, P., Faw, G., McMorrow, M., Ori, L., Berkowitz, B., & Nigra, M. (2002). Increasing functional rehabilitation in acquired brain injury treatment: Effective appliations of behavioural principles. Brain Injury, 16, 849-860. doi: 10.1080/02699050210131957 Guercio, J.M. & Dixon, M.R. (2010). Improving the quality of staff and participant interaction in an acquired brain injury organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 30, 49-56. doi: 10.1080/01608060903529780 Soldner, J.L., Rehfeldt, R.A., Guercio, J., & Dillen, J. (2005). The use of computer activity schedules to increase initiation of and engagement in domestic and leisure activities in an adult with acquired brain injury. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 6, 173-177. doi: 10.1080/15021149.2005.11434259 If you're interested in ordering CEs for listening to this episode, click here to go to the store page. You'll need to enter your name, BCBA #, and the two episode secret code words to complete the purchase. Email us at abainsidetrack@gmail.com for further assistance.

Happy 2024, y'all! And boy are we coming in hot with the latest fads in treament and your ethical responsibility to respond skeptically to them. After that we chat with Dr. John Guercio about what's new with effective programming curricula for adults with disabilities and take a dive into the latest in error correction research. Then it all goes off a cliff with our most dramatic Grab Bag episode ever with Book Club Guy, Alan Haberman. Apparently our New Year's Resolution was to win an Oscar. Articles for January 2024 (ETHICS) Ethics of Fad Treatments Zane, T., Davis, C., & Rosswurm, M. (2008). The cost of fad treatments in autism. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 5, 44-51. doi: 10.1037/h0100418 Schreck, K.A. & Miller, V.A. (2010). How to behave ethically in a world of fads. Behavior Interventions, 25, 307-324. doi: 10.1002/bin.305 Moore, K.M., Cividini-Motta, C.C., Clark, K.M., & Ahearn, W.H. (2015). Sensory integration as a treatment for automatically maintained stereotypy. Behavioral Interventions, 30, 95-111. doi: 10.1002/bin.1405 Grab-Bo Baggins w/ Alan Haberman Heward, W.L. Kimball, J.W., Heckaman, K.A., & Dunne, J.D. (2021). In his own words: Siegfried “Zig” Englemann talks about what's wrong with education and how to fix it. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14, 766-774. doi: 10.1007/s40617-021-00636-x Greenwald, A. (2023). Prompting and modeling of coping strategies during childbirth. Behavior Analysis in Practice. doi: 10.1007/s40617-023-00837-6 Sheehan, A (2022). The development of a participatory tool to enable autistic people to influence the interior design of their homes. Good Autism Practice, 23, 13-26. Shores, R. E., Gunter, P. L., & Jack, S. L. (1993). Classroom Management Strategies: Are They Setting Events for Coercion? Behavioral Disorders, 18, 92–102. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23887084 Curriculum for Adults w/ Dr. John Guercio Wilson, A.N., Kasson, E.M., Gratz, O., & Guercio, J.M. (2015). Exploring the clinical utility of a stimulus avoidance assessment to enhance a relaxation training model. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8, 57-61. doi: 10.1007/s40617-014-0035-y Guercio, J., Davis, P., Faw, G., McMorrow, M., Ori, L., Berkowitz, B., & Nigra, M. (2002). Increasing functional rehabilitation in acquired brain injury treatment: Effective appliations of behavioural principles. Brain Injury, 16, 849-860. doi: 10.1080/02699050210131957 Guercio, J.M. & Dixon, M.R. (2010). Improving the quality of staff and participant interaction in an acquired brain injury organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 30, 49-56. doi: 10.1080/01608060903529780 Soldner, J.L., Rehfeldt, R.A., Guercio, J., & Dillen, J. (2005). The use of computer activity schedules to increase initiation of and engagement in domestic and leisure activities in an adult with acquired brain injury. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 6, 173-177. doi: 10.1080/15021149.2005.11434259 Error Correction Leaf, J.B., Cihon, J.H., Ferguson, J.L., Milne, C.M., Leaf, R., & McEachin. (2020). Comparing error correction to errorless learning: A randomized clinical trial. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 36, 1-20. doi: 10.1007/s40616-019-00124-y Carroll, R.A., Joachim, B.T., St. Peter, C.C., & Robinson, N. (2015). A comparison of error-correction procedures on skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 257-273. doi: 10.1002/jaba.205 Carroll, R.A., Owsiany, J., & Cheatham, J.M. (2018). Using an abbreviated assessment to identify effective error-correction procedures for individual learners during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 51, 482-501. doi: 10.1002/jaba.460 Cariveau, T., Montilla, A.L.C., Gonzalez, E., & Ball, S. (2019). A review of error correction procedures during instruction for children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52, 574-579. doi: 10.1002/jaba.524 Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Behavior Analysts Book Club (Patrons Only) Dixon, M.R., Hayes, S.C., & Belisle, J. (2023). Acceptance and commitment therapy for behavior analysts: A practice guide from theory to treatment. Routledge.

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network.

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/education

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Princeton University Press' Our Compelling Interests series focuses on diversity, in racial, gender, socioeconomic, religious, and other forms. Some of the titles in this series so far include The Walls around Opportunity: The Failure of Colorblind Policy for Higher Education by Gary Orfield, Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise By Eboo Patel, and The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy, by Scott E. Page. Earl Lewis is the Thomas C. Holt Distinguished University Professor of history, Afroamerican and African Studies, and Public Policy and director of the Center for Social Solutions at the University of Michigan. From March 2013-2018, he served as President of The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Nancy Cantor is Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and member of the National Academy of Medicine, she previously led Syracuse University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and was provost at the University of Michigan, where she was closely involved in the defense of affirmative action in 2003 Supreme Court cases Grutter and Gratz. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our consultants receive a lot of questions from clients about applying to MBA programs through The Consortium for Graduate Study in Management. I've heard myths that suggest that applying to one (or more) of the 22 Consortium schools through The Consortium's application is disadvantageous. But as the former director at two Consortium schools, I can assure you that nothing could be further from the truth — provided you meet The Consortium's minimum qualifications. Though the requirements, participating schools, and corporate partners have changed over The Consortium's 57-year history, not only is the organization the best deal in town but it also gives its members an alumni network that extends throughout the 22 member schools. The Consortium history and mission Initially, The Consortium provided opportunities for young African-American men to have a fair chance at rising up the corporate ladder via the MBA. Later, The Consortium added Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and women to its mix. Membership came along with the fellowship. However, after the Supreme Court decided the Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger cases, The Consortium opened its doors to offer membership to selected applicants that further The Consortium's mission to promote the “inclusion in global business education and leadership . . . of African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Native Americans.” Members do not need to belong to one of these groups but must demonstrate the mission through community and professional action and impact. Thus, membership is no longer race based but rather mission driven. Applicants must also demonstrate the ability to succeed in a Consortium member school's MBA program. Consortium member benefits Like the undergraduate Common App, candidates can apply to up to six schools with only one application for a fraction of the cost that the candidate would incur by applying to each school separately. The Consortium membership grants the candidate access to the orientation and corporate partners. Many members receive internship offers before the start of school. To summarize the benefits: Applicants can use a single application for up to six schools at one low cost. Members gain access to a vast alumni network of 22 schools, including mentorship from among the approximately 9,000 Consortium alumni (formal or informal). Students gain access to corporate sponsors at orientation if selected as a member. If selected as a fellow, students receive full tuition and a stipend. READ: The Consortium Application: Tips for Your CGSM Essays >> Consortium member schools Consortium Member SchoolAverage GMAT Score (Class of 2024)Average Undergraduate GPA (Class of 2024) Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business7023.33 Columbia University, Columbia Business School7293.60 Cornell University, Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management7103.30 Dartmouth College, Tuck School of Business7263.52 Emory University, Goizueta Business School 7003.38 Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business6973.29 Indiana University-Bloomington, Kelley School of Business6853.38 New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business7333.62 Indiana University-Bloomington, Kelley School of Business6853.38 New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business7333.62 Rice University, Jones Graduate School of Business7023.43 Stanford University, Stanford Graduate School of Business7373.76 The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Kenan-Flagler Business School 7063.43 The University of Texas at Austin, McCombs School of Business7063.48 University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business7293.64 University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA Anderson School of Management711NA* University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, Michigan Ross School of Business7203.50 University of Rochester, Simon Business SchoolNA*NA*

With the Supreme Court weighing two cases involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina that could end affirmative action in higher education, scholars William B. Allen of Michigan State University and Hasan Kwame Jeffries of The Ohio State University discuss its future. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates.  Additional Resources William B. Allen, “End of Affirmative Action 2023”   William B. Allen, Drew S. Days III, Benjamin L. Hooks, and William Bradford Reynolds, “Is Affirmative Action Constitutional?” AEI Journal on Government and Society   Jonathan Hicks, “Proponents Worry About Supreme Court Review of Affirmative Action,” BET   “Why Conservatives want the Supreme Court to take up Affirmative Action Case,” Yahoo!News   National Constitution Center, “14th Amendment: Citizenship Rights, Equal Protection, Apportionment, Civil War Debt,” Interactive Constitution   National Constitution Center, “Affirmative Action and the 14th Amendment,” Live at the National Constitution   National Constitution Center, “Affirmative Action and the 14th Amendment – Part 1,” We the People podcast   National Constitution Center, “Affirmative Action and the 14th Amendment – Part 2,” We the People podcast   Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)   Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)   Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)   Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971) Oral Argument Trasnscript in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College   Oral Argument Trasnscript in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina   Slaughter-House Cases (1873) National Constitution Center, "Civil Rights Act of 1866," Founders' Library: Civil War and Reconstruction National Constitution Center, "Civil Rights Act of 1875," Founders' Library: Civil War and Reconstruction Shelby County v. Holder (2013)   Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.

In this special extended edition of the Seven Ages Audio Journal, the team welcomes Dr. Nicholas Hellmuth, who shares his fascinating story of conquering the jungles of South America to find one of the most significant and awe-inspiring tombs at the Mayan site of Tikal in the 1960s at the age of nineteen (a YouTube video and slide presentation appearing on the Seven Ages YouTube Channel will accompany this special edition). Dr. Nicholas Hellmuth has an undergraduate degree, from Harvard; a Master's degree from Brown University, and three different post-graduate research positions at Yale University. With his Ph.D. from the University of Gratz, Hellmuth is a previous research professor in digital photography at Rollins College and at Brevard Community College both in Florida. He was a Visiting Research Professor of (digital imaging and digital printing) simultaneously at BGSU (in Ohio) and Universidad Francisco Marrokeen (Guatemala) from 2000-2005. He now works full-time on the flora and fauna of Mayan areas of Mesoamerica and also works with the foundation for Latin American Anthropological Research. (FLAAR) Twitter  Instagram  Facebook  Seven Ages Official Site  Patreon  Seven Ages Youtube  Guest Links: FLAAR Mesoamerica 

This week I welcome Alan Gratz to the show. We'll be talking about his latest #1 New York Times bestselling young adult novel, Two Degrees and the controversy over the Kutztown Area School District's canceling their "One Book, Once School" middle school program that was set to read Two Degrees. Why did they cancel reading his book? It's a familiar story of right-wing extremism infecting our schools. Right-wing members on the school board and in the community objected to reading a book that accepted the reality and the threats posed by climate change.  On April 15th, Gratz will be one of the Featured Speakers at the 25th Annual Kutztown University Children's Literature Conference. In the wake of the decision by the Kutztown Area School District to cancel their "One School, One Book" program, he made extra time to meet with the community while in town. He will be doing two events at Firefly Bookstore in Kutztown on April 15th as well. At the evening event, he will be interviewed by Joslyn Diffenbaugh, founder of the local Teen Banned Book Club. Details for the events can be found on Firefly Bookstore's Facebook page and through the links in the show notes.  Alan Gratz is the #1 New York Times bestselling author of nineteen novels and graphic novels for young readers, including Two Degrees, Captain America: The Ghost Army, Ground Zero, Refugee, Allies, Prisoner B-3087, and Ban This Book. A Knoxville, Tennessee native, Alan is now a full-time writer living in Asheville, North Carolina with his wife and daughter. Learn more about him online at www.alangratz.com. LINKS: Alan Gratz's home page: https://www.alangratz.com/about/ Get Two Degrees at your local bookstore: https://www.indiebound.org/book/9781338735673 Firefly Bookstore events on April 15: https://bit.ly/40nVH4m Article: "In Kutztown schools, the right's culture warriors block a book on climate change," by Will Bunch, The Philadelphia Inquirer: https://bit.ly/3Kk3ACR Article: "Kutztown One Book, One School literacy program halted after outcry over book's focus on climate change," by Lisa Mitchell, The Reading Eagle: https://bit.ly/3ZMzywI Kutztown Organized for Educational Excellence (KOFEE): https://www.kofee.info/ You can support this show by becoming a patron for as little as $5/month at https://www.patreon.com/rcpress.  Don't Let Paul Martino & Friends Buy Our Schools and push extremist politics in our community. Raging Chicken has teamed up with LevelField to launch a truly community-rooted PAC to invest in organizing, support local and state-wide progressive candidates, and unmask the toxic organizations injecting our communities with right-wing extremism. We're putting small-dollar donations to work to beat back the power of Big Money.  You can get more information and drop your donation at  https://ragingchicken.levelfield.net/. Join our Discord to continue the conversation all week long: https://discord.gg/BnjRNz3u  

A lot of therapies address the context in which nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) and self-harm may occur, but only a few treatments have been designed to address NSSI specifically. In this episode, we dive into one of these treatments: Emotion Regulation Group Therapy (ERGT). Drs. Kim Gratz and Matthew Tull from the University of Toledo in Ohio walk us through in significant detail each of the 90-minute 14 sessions of ERGT.Learn more about Dr. Gratz here and reach her at klgratz28@gmail.com. Learn more about Dr. Tull here and follow him on Twitter @MTTull. Learn more about the Personality and Emotion Research and Treatment (PERT) Laboratory within the Department of Psychology at the University of Toledo here, and follow the PERT Lab on Twitter @LabPert. Below are links to their research on ERGT referenced in this episode:Gratz, K. L., & Gunderson, J. G. (2006). Preliminary data on an acceptance-based emotion regulation group intervention for deliberate self-harm among women with Borderline Personality Disorder. Behavior Therapy, 37(1), 25-35.Gratz, K. L., & Tull, M. T. (2011). Extending research on the utility of an adjunctive emotion regulation group therapy for deliberate self-harm among women with borderline personality pathology. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 2(4), 316–326.Gratz, K. L., Tull, M. T., & Levy, R. (2014). Randomized controlled trial and uncontrolled 9-month follow-up of an adjunctive emotion regulation group therapy for deliberate self-harm among women with borderline personality disorder. Psychological Medicine, 44, 2099–2112.Gratz, K. L., Bardeen, J. R., Levy, R., Dixon-Gordon, K., L., & Tull, M. T. (2015). Mechanisms of change in an emotion regulation group therapy for deliberate self-harm among women with borderline personality disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 65, 29-35.Sahlin, H., Bjureberg, J., Gratz, K. L., Tull, M. T., Hedman, E., Bjarehed, J., Jokinen, J., Lundh, L., Ljotsson, B., & Hellner, C. (2017). Emotion regulation group therapy for deliberate self-harm: A multi-site evaluation in routine care using an uncontrolled open trial design. BMJ Open, 7(10), e016220.Follow Dr. Westers on Instagram and Twitter (@DocWesters). To join ISSS, visit itriples.org and follow ISSS on Facebook and Twitter (@ITripleS).The Psychology of Self-Injury podcast has been rated #5 by Feedspot in their "Best 20 Clinical Psychology Podcasts" and by Welp Magazine in their "20 Best Injury Podcasts."

(Lucy) Rebecca Gratz helped to shape the vibrant cultural life of Philadelphia after the Revolutionary War. A second-generation immigrant, she supported artists and public institutions, and pioneered co-ed religious and cultural education for American Jewish children. She lived a remarkable life, and lived long enough to be photographed. She is also sometimes credited with being the real-life prototype for one of the nineteenth century's most popular heroines, Sir Walter Scott's Rebecca.

Ah yes! The second-to-last vice principal potential for 1872! As we near the end of this VP conga, we get a... rather refreshing look at a man a head of his time.

To support independent ski journalism, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This podcast hit paid subscribers' inboxes on Dec. 10. It dropped for free subscribers on Dec. 13. To receive future pods as soon as they're live, please consider an upgrade to a paid subscription.WhoJoel Gratz, Founding Meteorologist and CEO of OpenSnowRecorded onNovember 17, 2022About OpenSnowOpenSnow is a snow and weather forecasting service. It gives you all this, depending on whether or not you want to pay for it:Gratz founded OpenSnow 11 years ago with an email list of 37 people. The company's list now numbers 3 million. Or so. It's like counting flakes in a storm. There are lots of them. The service pinpoints snowfall everywhere on the planet. So Backcountry Bro, you're covered. Lift-Served Larry (that's me), you're covered too. Uphill Harvey – we really wish you'd just pick a side and stop f*****g up the grooming before the lifts open.Anyway, if you love snow and want to know how much of it is going to fall, and where and when, then this app should be your Excalibur. Wield it wisely, Fellow Snowbum.  Why I interviewed himYou know how some people want to live in Florida and make exasperated sounds when more snow materializes on the radar and plan wintertime vacations to places like Aruba? Well I am not one of those people. And neither is Joel Gratz. Wintertime is for skiing. And to enjoy skiing as much as possible, it helps to follow the snow around. That's what Joel, and his brilliant website/app/service, OpenSnow, do.Everyone reading this newsletter is programmed in a different way from Human V1.0. We run toward storms that most humans flee. With urgency. Like some snowy version of a firefighter. Like insane people. Because we know what the genuflecting and hysterical weatherman does not: that snow is potent and intoxicating; that it changes the world and everything in it, including the people who immerse themselves within. If an adult charges into a sandbox or waterpark or ballpit, we regard them suspiciously. That stuff is for kids. But if they spend the day bouncing through snow and enter the bar boot-clicking and semi-dazed and white-draped and grinning madly and asking for a tallboy, we ask them to stand up at our wedding.No one gets this but skiers. And so no one could make a truly ski-centric weather app other than a skier. Someone whose headline, upon analyzing an incoming storm, isn't DEAR GOD DO NOT STEP OUTSIDE STOCK UP ON AMMUNITION AND DRY RATIONS BECAUSE THIS IS IT PEOPLE, but rather DEAR GOD IT'S ABOUT TO SNOW 90 INCHES IN TAHOE GET THERE AS FAST AS POSSIBLE!There are plenty of ways to track the weather, of course. Lots of apps, lots of weather services, lots of social media groups. I haven't found one better than OpenSnow, where I can look up any specific ski area and see an hour-by-hour and day-by-day snowfall and weather forecast for 10 days into the future. And that's all I really care about: where will it snow, how much, and when? With a meteorology degree on his wall and a couple decades in his mad-scientist's snow lab, Gratz is as well-equipped to deliver this information as anyone on the planet.What we talked aboutHow early a ski weather guy wakes up; Joel's wintertime and powder-day routine; the secrets of good powder skiing; how a meteorologist was born; Shawnee, Pennsylvania; do they even want snow in the Poconos?; Penn State meteorology; skiing Tussey; an Alpine Meadows powder day on racing skis; Boulder as innovation incubator; how a Vail old-timer outsmarted the guy with the fancy meteorology degree; the mystery of mountain microclimates; the missed Steamboat powder day that inspired the creation of OpenSnow; an email goes out to 37 people on a Tuesday night; a fortuitous conversation with Chris Davenport; how long it took OpenSnow to really establish itself; “a lot of your good fortune is just being born when and where you were”; the several simultaneous tech innovations that enabled widespread online weather forecasting; breaking down the various global weather services (GFS, Euro, etc.), and how they work; “modern meteorology is a miracle of cooperation and funding from taxpayers like us all around the world”; translating raw data and forecasts into the thing skiers most care about: how much is it going to snow, when, and where?; removing the human from the forecasting equation; why and how OpenSnow scaled from Colorado to the rest of the world; why OpenSnow doesn't capture every ski area in the world (yet); snow forecasts for any mapdot on the planet; why OpenSnow shifted to a subscription model and what it meant for the business; La Niña; breaking down the strong early start for the West and the weak weather in New England; dumb meteorology jokes; the two things you need to make snow; breaking down the unique weather systems that determine snowfall for the Cottonwoods, Mt. Baker, Keystone, Tahoe, the Great Lakes, and northern Vermont; how wind impacts snow quality; and America's snowiest places.Why I thought that now was a good time for this interviewThe image in the “About OpenSnow” section above distills the benefits of the paid subscription tier succinctly: to tap the service's best features, you need to pay. It's worth it. I subscribed long before our partnership, and I continue to.But OpenSnow wasn't always so arranged. For years, Gratz and his team lived on advertising. At some point, they activated a paywall to access certain features, but much of the site remained free.That changed last year, when OpenSnow migrated the majority of its content to its paid tier. Gratz explains why in the podcast, but this business decision resonated with me for obvious reasons. To remain relevant and useful, most digital ski-focused media platforms require an intense and consistent focus. That requires time, energy, passion, and commitment – all attributes that our capitalist society has deemed worth paying for in the form of labor. Labor, we decided a long time ago, cannot be free. Thus, products produced with labor – and media is a product – require a pricetag to access.This is easier to understand when you're purchasing a toaster or a car than when you're buying access to a podcast or a snow forecast. It helps to remember that, in the scope of history, the internet is still pretty new. I grew up without it, and I'm not that old. We're still figuring out how to price the considerable volume of information that we find there. Most of it, I'll admit, is worthless, but some of it is worth quite a bit. But several generations of Americans arrived at the internet with the understanding that it was a frivolous add-on, a place to waste time and get in trouble, a soul vacuum that was the domain of creeps and morons. They have a hard time acknowledging the evolution of the web into a utility, an essential pipeline of connection and information, a place of intangible things with tangible value.That was the challenge OpenSnow faced in finding a path to long-term sustainability. And it is the challenge I face with The Storm. I did it for free for as long as I could. The first 2,076 hours of labor were on me. Then I asked for money. The transition went beyond my expectations. Hundreds of people upgraded their subscriptions right away, and hundreds more have upgraded since. New paid subscribers join just about every day. The Storm is now a sustainable operation. And so, having made the same decision – on a much larger scale – is OpenSnow.I'm sure you've read about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a rat's nest of floating plastic refuse covering more than 600,000-square-miles of the Pacific Ocean. Most of its contents are microplastics – the smashed-up bits of water bottles and medicine containers and candy-bar wrappers. You just know that floating somewhere in there is a Yeti cooler and fully intact G.I. Joe hovercraft (I keep waiting for Disney to release: Toy Story: Tales of the Garbage Patch, featuring a scrappy band of discarded toys who A-Team their way back to the mainland), but most of it is useless garbage.The internet is a lot like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch: an unfathomable well of junk, sprinkled with a few treasures. There's a reason I occasionally step out of my ski-area-manager lane to interview journalists or individuals running ski-related websites: I want to help you find the G.I. Joe Killer W.H.A.L.E.s, the things worth scooping out of the water and taking home.Why you should use OpenSnowWhile OpenSnow is a Storm advertising partner, this podcast was not part of, and is not related to, that partnership. OpenSnow did not have any editorial input into the content or editing of this podcast - which is true of any guest on any episode. I don't do sponsored content. The Storm is independent ski media, based on reporting and independently verified facts - any opinion is synthesized through that lens, as it is with any good journalism outlet.That said, it's a great service, and one that I use every day of the winter – that's why I partnered with them. And part of our partnership is this special link where you can get two free months of OpenSnow. So you should probably take advantage of that so they want to keep working with me:Podcast NotesJoel references Baker's record snowfall year – it was 1,140 inches from 1998 to '99. You can read about that and some other big snow totals here.The Storm publishes year-round, and guarantees 100 articles per year. This is article 133/100 in 2022, and number 379 since launching on Oct. 13, 2019. Want to send feedback? Reply to this email and I will answer (unless you sound insane, or, more likely, I just get busy). You can also email skiing@substack.com.The Storm is exploring the world of lift-served skiing year-round - join us. Get full access to The Storm Skiing Journal and Podcast at www.stormskiing.com/subscribe

Mike Hoa Nguyen, assistant professor of education, faculty affiliate at the Institute for Human Development and Social Change, and faculty affiliate at the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools at New York University, leads the conversation on affirmative action. FASKIANOS: Thank you. Welcome to CFR's Higher Education Webinar. I'm Irina Faskianos, Vice President of the National Program and Outreach at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record, and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We are delighted to have Mike Hoa Nguyen with us to discuss affirmative action. Dr. Nguyen is assistant professor of education at New York University's Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development. He's also a faculty affiliate at NYU's Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools and a faculty affiliate at NYU's Institute for Human Development and Social Change. Additionally, Dr. Nguyen is a principal investigator of the Minority Serving Institutions Data Project. And prior to coming to NYU he was at the University of Denver. He has extensive professional experience in the federal government and has managed multiple complex, long-term intergovernmental projects and initiatives, focusing on postsecondary education and the judiciary and has published his work widely, including in Educational Researcher, The Journal of Higher Education, and The Review of Higher Education. So Mike, thanks very much for being with us today to talk about affirmative action. Could you give us an overview of where we are, the history of affirmative action, where we are now, and examples of criteria that are used by different institutions? NGUYEN: Well, hello. And thank you so much, Irina. And also thank you to the Council on Foreign Relations for having me here today. It's a real honor. And thank you to many of you who are joining us today out of your busy schedules. I'm sure that many of you have been following the news for Harvard and UNC. And, of course, those cases were just heard at the Supreme Court about a month ago, on Halloween. And so today thank you for those questions. I'd love to be able to spend a little bit of time talking about the history of sort of what led us to this point. I also recognize that many joining us are also experts on this topic. So I really look forward to the conversation after my initial remarks. And so affirmative action, I think, as Philip Rubio has written, comes from centuries-old English legal concept of equity, right, or the administration of justice according to what is fair in a particular situation, as opposed to rigidly following a set of rules. It's defined by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission in 1977 as a term that is a broad—a term, in a broad sense, that encompasses any measure beyond a simple termination of discriminatory practice adopted to correct for past or present discrimination or to prevent discrimination from recurring in the future. Academics have defined affirmative action simply as something more than passive nondiscrimination, right. It means various organizations must act positively, affirmatively, and aggressively to remove all barriers, however informal or subtle, that prevent access by minorities and women to their rightful places in the employment and educational institutions of the United States. And certainly one of the earliest appearances of this term, affirmative action, in government documents came when President Kennedy, in his 1961 executive order, where he wrote that the mandate stated that government contractors, specifically those that were receiving federal dollars to, quote, take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and employees are treated during employment without regard of their race, creed, color, or national origin. Certainly President Kennedy created a committee on equal employment opportunity to make recommendations for this. And then later on President Johnson later expressed—I'm sorry—expanded on President Kennedy's approach to take a sort of more active antiracist posture, which he signaled in a commencement speech at Howard University. In the decades following, of course, political-legal attacks have rolled back on how affirmative action can be implemented and for what purposes. So in admissions practices at U.S. colleges and universities today, really they can only consider race as one of many factors through a holistic process or holistic practices if so-called race-neutral approaches to admissions policies have fallen short in allowing for a campus to enroll a racially diverse class in order to achieve or reap the benefits of diversity, the educational benefits of diversity. Federal case law established by the courts have affirmed and reaffirmed that colleges may only consider race as one of many factors for the purposes of obtaining the educational benefits in diversity. So starting with the Bakke decision in the late 1970s, the Court limited the consideration of race in admissions and replaced the rationale for the use of race, specifically the rationale which was addressing historic and ongoing racism or systemic and racial oppression, instead in favor of the diversity rationale. So, in other words, if a college or university wishes to use race in their admissions, they can only do so with the intention of enhancing the educational benefits of all students. It may not legally use race as a part of their admissions process for the purpose of acknowledging historical or contemporary racism as barriers to equity in college access. If we fast-forward to something more recent, the two cases out of Michigan, the Grutter and Gratz case, what we saw there were really—significant part of the discussions of these two cases were really informed and conversations really about the educational benefits of diversity. That was really a key aspect of those cases. Lawsuits challenging the use of race in college admissions after those two cases now can sort of be traced to Edward Blum, a conservative activist, and his organization, Students for Fair Admission, or SFFA. So Blum has really dedicated his life to establishing what he calls a colorblind American society by filing lawsuits with the goal of dismantling laws and policies seeking to advance racial justice. This includes redistricting, voting rights, and, of course, affirmative action. So in 2000—in the 2000s, he recruited Abigail Fisher to challenge the University of Texas in their admissions program. The Court, the Supreme Court, ultimately ruled in favor of Texas in the second Fisher case—Fisher II, as we call it. And so that's actually where we saw Ed Blum alter his tactics. In this case he established SFFA, where he then purposefully recruited Asian Americans as plaintiffs in order to sue Harvard and UNC. So the cases now at Harvard—are now certainly at the Supreme Court. But one sort of less-known case that hasn't got a whole lot of attention, actually, was—that was sort of on the parallel track, actually originated from the U.S. Department of Justice more recently, during the Trump administration, which launched an investigation into Yale's admissions practices, which also focus on Asian Americans. And this was around 2018, so not too long ago. And certainly Asian Americans have been engaged in affirmative action debate since the 1970s. But these lawsuits have really placed them front and center in sort of our national debate. And so I think it's really important to also note that while empirical research demonstrates and shows that the majority of Asian Americans are actually in support of affirmative action, a very vocal minority of Asian Americans are certainly opposed to race-conscious admissions and are part of these lawsuit efforts. But interestingly enough, they've received a large and disproportionate share of media attention and sort of—I stress this only because I think popular press and media have done a not-so-great job at reporting on this. And their framing, I think, sometimes relies on old stereotypes, harmful stereotypes, about Asian Americans, and written in a way that starts with an assumption that all Asian Americans are opposed to affirmative action when, again, empirical research and national polls show that that's certainly not the case, right, and much more complex than that. But anyway, so back to what I was saying earlier, in sort of the waning months of the Trump administration the Department of Justice used those investigations into Yale to file a lawsuit charging that Yale in its admissions practices discriminates against Asian Americans. This lawsuit, the DOJ lawsuit, was dropped in February of 2021 when President Biden took office. So in response to that, SFFA submitted its own lawsuit to Yale based upon similar lines of reasoning. So I think what's—why bring this up? One, because it doesn't get a lot of attention. But two, I think it's a really interesting and curious example. So in the Yale case, as well as in the previous DOJ complaint, Ed Blum notes specifically that they exclude Cambodian Americans, Hmong Americans, Laotian Americans, and Vietnamese Americans from the lawsuit, and thus from his definition of what and who counts as Asian American. I think this intentional exclusion of specific Southeast Asian American groups in Yale, but including them in Harvard, is a really interesting and curious note. I've written in the past that, sort of at the practical level, it's a bit—it's not a bit—it's a lot misleading. It's manipulative and advances a bit of a false narrative about Asian Americans. And I think it engages in what we call sort of a racial project to overtly reclassify the Asian American racial category, relying again on old stereotypes about Asian American academic achievement. But it also sort of counters state-based racial and ethnic classifications used by the Census Bureau, used by the Department of Education, used by OMB, right. It does not consider how Southeast Asian Americans have been and are racialized, as well as how they've built pan-ethnic Asian American coalitions along within and with other Asian American subgroups. So the implications of this sort of intentional racialized action, I think, are threefold. First, this process, sort of trying to redefine who is Asian American and who isn't, demonstrates that SFFA cannot effectively argue that race-conscious admissions harms Asian Americans. They wouldn't be excluded if that was the case. Second, it illustrates that Ed Blum and his crusade for sort of race—not using race in college admissions is actually really not focused on advancing justice for Asian Americans, as he claims. And then finally, I think that this maneuver, if realized, will really disenfranchise educational access and opportunity for many Asian Americans, including Southeast Asian Americans and other communities of color. Of course, this case hasn't received a lot of attention, given that we just heard from Harvard and UNC at the Supreme Court about a month ago. But I think it provides some really important considerations regarding the upcoming Supreme Court decision. Nonetheless the decision for Harvard and UNC, we're all sort of on pins and needles until we hear about it in spring and summer. And I was there in Washington for it, and so what I'd actually like to do is actually share some interesting notes and items that sort of struck out to me during the oral arguments. So I think in both cases we heard the justices ask many questions regarding the twenty-five-year sunset of using race in college admissions, right, something that Justice O'Connor wrote in the Michigan case. I think the solicitor general, Solicitor General Prelogar's response at the conclusion of the case was really insightful. She said—and I'm sort of paraphrasing here about why we—in addressing some of the questions about that twenty-five-year sunset, she basically said that society hasn't made enough progress yet. The arc of progress is slower than what the Grutter court had imagined. And so we just suddenly don't hit 2028—that's twenty-five years from the decision—and then, snap, race is not used in college admissions anymore. There was also a lot of discussion regarding proxy approaches to so-called race-neutral admissions, right, yet still being able to maintain some or similar levels of racial diversity. I think what we know from a lot of empirical research out there is that there's really no good proxy variables for race. Certainly Texas has its 10 percent plan, which really only works to a certain extent and does not actually work well for, say, private schools that draw students from across all fifty states and the territories in the Caribbean and the Pacific. And again, as the solicitor general stated, it doesn't work well for the service academies either, for really similar reasons. I do think the line of questioning from the chief justice again related to what sounded like a carveout exemption for our U.S. military schools, our service academies. What's really interesting, and might be of actually specific interest for the CFR community, of course, our service academies practice affirmative action and are in support of it. And this was also argued in an amicus brief written by retired generals and admirals. And they argued that race-conscious admissions is necessary to build a diverse officer corps at both the service academies as well as ROTC programs at various universities across the country, which, in their words, they say builds a more cohesive, collaborative, and effective fighting unit, especially, quote, given recent international conflicts and humanitarian crises which require our military to perform civil functions and call for heightened cultural awareness and sensitivity in religious issues. And so, to a certain extent, I think that same line of logic can also be extended to, for example, our diplomatic corps, and certainly many corporations. We also saw briefs from the field of medicine, from science and research, have all written in support of race-conscious admissions, along the same sort of pipeline issues as their companies and organizations. And they argue that their work benefits from a highly educated, diverse workforce. But what was interesting, was that there wasn't much discussion about Asian Americans. It was only brought up sort of a handful of times, despite the fact that certainly that's sort of the origin story of the sets of lawsuits. And perhaps—to me perhaps this is simply an indication that the case was really never about Asian Americans from the beginning. And certainly the finding from the district court shows that Asian Americans are not discriminated in this process at Harvard. And so we will all sort of see how the Court rules next year, if they uphold precedent or not, and if they do not, how narrow or how broad they will go. Justice Barrett did have an interesting question in the UNC part of the case about affinity groups and affinity housing on campus. So, for example, my undergraduate alma mater, UC Berkeley, has this for several groups. They have affinity housing for Asian Americans, African Americans, Native Americans, women in STEM, the LGBTQ+ community, Latinx students, among many, many others, actually. So I think a possible area of concern is if they go broad, will we see a ban on these types of race-based practices on campus? Would that impact sort of thinking about recruitment efforts? So these so-called race-neutral approaches, sort of recruitment and outreach services for particular communities. Or would that impact something like HBCUs and tribal colleges, HSIs and AANAPISIs, or other MSIs? How does that all fit in, right? I think that line of questioning sort of sparked a bit of concern from folks and my colleagues. But I think, though, in conversation, we don't think the Court has really any appetite to go that far. And I'm certainly inclined to agree. But end of the day, that line of questioning was rather curious. And so, with that, I thank you for letting me share some of my thinking and about what's going on. And I would really love to be able to engage in conversation with all of you. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you so much. And we'd love to hear now from you all questions and comments, and if you could share how things are happening on your campuses. Please raise—click on the raised-hand icon on your screen to ask a question. If you're on an iPad or tablet, you can click the More button to access the raised-hand feature. I'll call on you, and then accept the unmute prompt, state your name and affiliation, followed by your question. You can also submit a written question in the Q&A box or vote for questions that have been written there. And if you do write your question, it would be great if you could write who you are. I'm going to go first to a raised hand, Morton Holbrook. And there you go. Q: I'm there, yeah. Morton Holbrook from Kentucky Wesleyan College in Kentucky. Thanks, Professor Nguyen. Sort of a two-part question here. One is, how do you reconcile apparent public support for affirmative action with the number of states, I think ten or twelve states, that have banned affirmative action? Are their legislators just out of touch with their people, or what? And the second part is, a recent article in the Washington Post about UC Berkeley's experience, where the number of African American students simply plummeted down to about 3 percent, and at the same time that campus is still very diverse in other respects. Have you made a study of all the states that have banned affirmative action? Have they all had that same result with regard to African Americans? Or where does that stand? Thank you. NGUYEN: Thank you. Thank you for the really excellent question. I think it's about—I think you're right—around nine, ten or so states that have banned affirmative action. You know, I'll be completely honest with you. I'm really just familiar with the bans that were instituted both in California and in Michigan, and those were through state referendums, right, and not necessarily legislature. So in this case, this is the people voting for it. And so I think that's a really tough nut to crack about how do you reconcile these bans at the state level versus sort of what we see at the national level. And so I think this is sort of the big challenge that advocates for racial equity are facing in places like California. They actually tried to repeal this in California recently, in the last decade. And again, that failed. And so I think part of the issue here is there's a whole lot of misinformation out there. I think that's one key issue. I sort of said in my opening remarks there that, at least in some of the popular media pieces today about these cases, the way Asian Americans are sort of understood and written about is really not aligned with a lot of the rich empirical research out there that shows quite the contrary, as well as sort of historical research that shows quite the contrary. And so I think there's a lot of public opinion being formulated as well as, again, just sort of misinformation about the topic that might be leading folks to think one way or another. To your second question about UC Berkeley, my alma mater, you're right. After that Prop 209 ban, you saw a huge decline in undergraduate enrollment, specifically of African American students. And so Berkeley has been trying every which way to figure out a race—a so-called race-neutral approach in order to increase those numbers. And I think they are trying to—they are really trying to figure it out. And I think that's why UC Berkeley, UCLA, other institutions submitted amicus briefs in support of Harvard, in support of UNC, because they know that there are not a lot—when you can't use race, that's a result that you end up with. And that's because there are just not good proxy variables for race. SES or economic status is often talked about a lot. That again isn't a good variable. Geography can—to a certain extent can be used. All these can sort of certainly be used in some combination. But again, they do not serve well as proxy variables. And I think that's why we see those numbers at Berkeley. And I think that's why Berkeley was so invested in this case and why all those campus leaders submitted amicus briefs in support of Harvard and UNC. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next written question or first written question from Darko Spasevski, who's at the University of Skopje, North Macedonia: Do you think that in order to have successful affirmative actions in the higher education this process should be followed by affirmative actions in the workplace? Are the benefits—if the affirmative actions are only promoted at the level of higher education but are not at the same time continuing at the workplace? I guess it would be the opposite. Is it—you know, basically, should affirmative action be promoted in the workplace as well— NGUYEN: Yeah, I think— FASKIANOS: —once you get past the higher education? NGUYEN: Got it. Yeah, I think I understand that question. Actually, this was something that came up during this recent Supreme Court case. Again, the solicitor general was talking about specifically the briefs from the retired generals and admirals, as well as from various executives and corporations, talking about how affirmative action is so important at the university level because then it helps build a pipeline to recruit folks to work at those organizations or serve in the military, as well as that it trains all students, right, and lets them access and achieve the benefits of diversity and use that in their future employment, which research from areas of management show that that increases work productivity. It increases their bottom line, et cetera, et cetera. And so actually, in that argument, the—I think it was Justice Alito that asked, are you now arguing for this in the private sector, in corporations? And the solicitor general quickly said no, no. The context of this lawsuit is specifically or the position of the United States is specifically just focused here on higher education. And I think that certainly is relevant for this conversation today, as well as sort of my own area of expertise. But I think my colleagues in the areas of management and a lot of that work shows, I think, similar types of results that, when you have diverse workforces, when you have folks who can reap the benefits of diversity interactions, interracial interactions, then there are certainly a lot of benefits that come from that, in addition to creativity, work efficiency, so many things. And so, again, I'm not here to sort of put a position down regarding affirmative action in professional settings, only because that's not my area of expertise. But certainly other areas of research have pointed in similar directions as what's sort of shown in the higher-education literature. FASKIANOS: (Off mic) Renteln? And let's see if you can unmute yourself. If you click on the unmute prompt, you should be able to ask your question. Not working? Maybe not. OK, so I will read it. So— Q: Is it working now? FASKIANOS: It is, Alison. Go ahead. Q: Thank you. I'm sorry. It's just usually it shows me when I'm teaching. Thank you for a really interesting, incisive analysis; really enjoyed it. I wanted to ask about whether it's realistic to be able to implement policies that are, quote, race-neutral, unquote, given that people's surnames convey sometimes identities, ethnic and religious identities, and also activities that people participated in in professional associations. And when people have references or letters of recommendation, information about background comes out. So I'm wondering if you think that this debate really reflects a kind of polarization, a kind of symbolitics, and whether, while some worry about the consequences of the Supreme Court's decisions, this is really something that's more symbolic than something that could actually be implemented if the universities continue to be committed to affirmative action. NGUYEN: Really great question. Thank you so much for asking it. This was actually a big chunk of the conversation during oral arguments for both at UNC and both at Harvard, right. The justices were asking, so how do you—if you don't—and this was sort of the whole part about when they were talking about checking the box, checking sort of your racial category during the application process. And so they asked, if you get rid of that, what happens when students write about their experiences in their personal statements or, as you said, recommenders in their letters in about that? And so this was where it got really, really—I think the lawyers had a really hard time disentangling it, because for people of color, certainly a lot of their experiences, their racialized experiences, are inextricably linked to their race and their identity. And so removing that is, at an operationalized level, pretty hard to do and pretty impossible, right. So they actually had some interesting examples, like one—and so they're asking hypotheticals. Both lawyers—both the justices on all the various spectrum of the Court were asking sort of pointed questions. Where I think one justice asked, so can you talk about—can you talk about your family's experiences, particularly if your ancestors were slaves in the United States? And so the lawyers—this is the lawyer for SFFA saying that would not—we cannot use that. They cannot be used in admissions, because that is linked to their race. But can you—so another justice asked, can you talk about if, you know, your family immigrated to the United States? Can you—how do you talk about that? Can you talk about that? And the lawyers said, well, that would be permissible then, because that doesn't necessarily have to be tied to a racial group or a racial category. So again, it's very—I think what they were trying to tease out was how do you—what do you actually—what would actually be the way to restrict that, right? And so I guess, depending on how the justices decide this case, my assumption is or my hope is, depending on whatever way they go, they're going to—they will, one way or another, define or sort of place limits if they do end up removing the use of race. But I completely agree with you. Operationally, that's not an easy thing to do, right? And when do you decide what fits and what doesn't fit? And that will be the—that will be a big, big struggle I think universities will face if the courts ban the use of race in college admissions. FASKIANOS: Let me just add that Alison Dundes Renteln is a professor of political science at the University of Southern California. So I'm going to go to the next written question, from Clemente Abrokwaa at Penn State University: Do you think affirmative action should be redefined to reflect current social-demographic groups and needs? NGUYEN: Oh, that's such a fun question, and particularly for someone who studies race and racial formation in the United States. And so I—you know, this is—this is an interesting one. I think—I think sort of the way we think about—at least folks in my profession think about race versus sort of the way—the way it's currently accounted for in—by state-based classifications/definitions, those tend to be a little bit behind, right? That's normal and natural. But I think what we've seen in the United States over time is race has—or, racial classifications and categories have changed over time and continue to evolve, right? The Census—the Census Bureau has an advisory group to help them think through this when they collect this data. And so—and so I'll be honest with you, I don't have a good answer for you, actually. But I think—I think that certainly, given the fact that racial categories do shift and change over time and the meaning ascribed to them, we certainly need to take a—if we continue using approaches for—race- or ethnic-based approaches in college admissions, that's something that absolutely needs to be considered, right? But at the same time, it also means, as we think about sort of the future and what does that look like—and maybe, for example, here we're talking about folks who are—who identify as mixed race. But at the same time, we need to look historically, too, right? So we don't want to—the historical definitions and the way people would self-identify historically. And so I think—I think, certainly, the answer, then, would be—would be both, right? But what a fun question. Thanks for that question. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the moderator prerogative here and ask you about: How does affirmative action in higher education in the United States relate to, you know, relations abroad? NGUYEN: Yeah. Well— FASKIANOS: Have you looked at that connection? NGUYEN: Sure. I think—I think that—I think that's really, really interesting. So something that we wrote in our amicus brief particularly regarding—it was sort of in response to SFFA's brief and their claim, which was about sort of why Asian Americans here were so exceptional in their—in their academic achievements. I think that's a—tends to be a big stereotype, model minority stereotype. That is how Asian Americans are racialized. So one thing that we sort of wrote in our brief was this actually is really connected to a certain extent, right—for some Asian American groups in the United States, that's linked to U.S. foreign policy and U.S. immigration policy about who from Asia is allowed to immigrate to the United States, what their sort of educational background and requirements are. And so I think when we think about the arguments being made in this lawsuit and the way Asian Americans are discussed, certainly one key aspect there is certainly connected to historic U.S. foreign policy, particularly around—as well as immigration policy, particularly around the 1965 Immigration Act. So certainly they are connected and they're linked. And something that we—that I wish more people could—more people would read our brief, I guess, and get a good understanding of, sort of to add to the complexity of this lawsuit. FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to go back to Morton Holbrook. Q: Yes. Still here at Kentucky Wesleyan College. Speaking of amicus briefs, what do you think of the Catholic college brief from Georgetown University? Here we have a Court that's been very partial towards religious beliefs, and they're arguing that their religious beliefs requires them to seek diversity in college admissions. How do you think they'll fare in that argument? NGUYEN: Yeah. This was also brought up in—during oral arguments. I can't remember if it was during the UNC part or the Harvard part. And I'll be completely honest with you, I haven't read that brief yet. There's just so many and I wasn't able to read them all. But this was a really interesting—really interesting point that was sort of raised in the courts. And I don't—I don't—I don't have a good answer for you, to be completely honest. I'm not sure how they're going to, particularly given that these—that this Court seems to be very much in favor of religious liberty, right, how they would account for that amicus brief from the Catholic institutions. And so that will be an interesting one to watch and to see—to see how it's framed, and certainly it would be interesting if they played an outsized role in the justices' decision-making here. But great question. Great point to raise and something I'll add to my reading list for this weekend. FASKIANOS: So Alison Renteln came back with a question following on mine: Why are numerical quotas acceptable in other countries like India but not in the United States? NGUYEN: Yeah. Great, great question there. You know, also in other places like in Brazil. And so we, in fact, used to use numerical quotas before the Bakke decision. It was the Bakke decision, University of California v. Bakke, that eliminated the use of racial quotas, also eliminated the use of what I said earlier about sort of the rationales for why we can practice race-conscious admissions, which was it cannot be used to address historic racism or ongoing racism. In fact, the only rationale for why we can use affirmative action today as a—as a factor of many factors, is in order to—for universities to build campus environments—diverse campus environments of which there are benefits to diversity, the educational benefits of diversity that flows for all students. And so, yeah, it was the—it was the Supreme Court in the late 1970s that restricted the use of quotas among many other—many other rationales for the practice of race-conscious admissions. Thank you for that question. FASKIANOS: Great. And I'm going to go to next to raised hand from Emily Drew. Q: Great. Thank you. I'm listening in from Oregon, where I'm a sociologist. Thank you for all of these smart comments. My question is a little bit thinking out loud. What do you think about—it feels like there are some perils and dangers, but I'm hoping you'll reframe that for me, of some racialized groups like indigenous people saying, well, we're not a race anyway—we're tribes, we're nations—so that they're not subject to the ban on race-conscious practices, which, it's true, they're a tribe. They're also a racialized group. And so I'm struggling with groups kind of finding a political way around the ban or the potential ban that's coming, but then where does that leave us in terms of, you know, each group, like, take care of your own kind of thing? Can you just react a little bit to that? NGUYEN: Yeah. Thanks for that really wonderful question. Fascinating point about, yeah, the way to say: We're not a racial group. We're sovereign nations or sovereign tribes. I think what we're going to see, depending on how the courts go, are folks trying—schools potentially trying a whole host of different approaches to increase diversity on their campuses if they're not allowed to use some of these racial categories like they've been doing already, in a holistic approach. And so, yeah, that might be a fascinating way for indigenous communities to advance forward. I will say, though, there was one point, again, in the—during oral arguments where they started talking about sort of generational connections to racial categories. And so they're saying if it's my grandparents' grandparents' grandparents, right, so sort of talking almost about, like—at least the way I interpreted it, as sort of thinking about connecting one to a race via blood quantum. And so when does that—when does that expire, right? And so is it—is it—if you're one-sixteenth Native American, is that—does that count? So there was a short line of questioning about that, and I think the—I think the lawyer tried to draw a line in the sand about, like, at what point do you not go—what point does it count and when does it not count. And I think that's actually a bit of a misstep, primarily because that should be determined by the sovereign nation, by the tribe, about who gets to identify as that—as a member of that nation or that tribe and how they—I think—you know, I think, talking to indigenous scholars, they would say it's about how you engage in and how you live in it, rather than—rather than if it's just a percentage. So, again, those will be the tensions, I think, that will—that already exist, I should say, regardless of the Court decision. But a fascinating point about states sort of exercising indigenous law there to see if that would be a way to counter that. Certainly, I should—I should have said at the top of this I'm not trained as a lawyer. And so I have no idea how that would be sort of litigated out, but certainly I imagine all different entities will find ways to move through this without—in various legal fashions. And I was talking to a colleague earlier today about this and he said something about at the end of the day this might be something that, if Congress decided to take up, they may—this would be an opportunity for Congress to take up, to maybe develop a narrow path for institutions. But certainly it's—the courts seem to be the favored way for us to talk about affirmative action. FASKIANOS: There's a written question from John Francis, who is a research professor of political science at the University of Utah: If the Court were to strike down affirmative action, would state universities give much more attention to geographic recruitment within their respective states and encourage private foundations to raise scholarship funds to support students of color who live in those areas? NGUYEN: Great, great question there. And I think that would be one of many things that universities are doing. We're seeing schools where the states have banned affirmative action do things like this, in Michigan and certainly in California. But to a certain extent, it actually doesn't work—I guess in California's context—that well. I think, if I'm not mistaken, the head of admissions for UC Berkeley said in one of many panels—he's wonderful, by the way—on one of many panels, like, that doesn't work very well in the California context because only so many schools have sort of that large concentration of African American students and for them to sort of go there and recruit out of that. So it's not a—the sort of geographic distribution is not so easy and clean cut as—I think as one would normally perceive. And so it actually develops a big, big challenge for state institutions, particularly state flagship institutions, in particular geographic contexts. Now, I don't know if that's the case, say, in other parts of the country. But certainly within the UC system, that seems to be a prevailing argument. And I think more than ever now, everyone has been looking to the UC system for insight on what they—on how to approach this if the courts decide next year to ban the use of race. I should also admit that—or, not admit, but proudly declare that I'm a product of the UC system. All of my postsecondary education is from those schools. And so I know that this has been a constant and ongoing conversation within the UC system, and I imagine that will be the case for schools both public and private across the country. But I think part of that calculation then requires institutions to think about not just from private donors, but really from state legislatures as well as the institutions themselves have to really think about how they want to dedicate resources to achieving diversity if they don't—if they're unable to use race. I think a tremendous amount of resources. So, to a certain extent, it's going to make institutions put their money where their mouth is. And so we'll see if that—this will all be interesting areas to investigate, depending on how the courts decide come next year. FASKIANOS: There's a raised hand or there was a raised hand from Jeff Goldsmith. I don't know if you still have a question. Q: Yeah. So I've been trying to figure out exactly how I might want to pose this question, but I was struck by—sorry, this is Jeff Goldsmith from Columbia University. I was struck by the line of questioning that you mentioned from Justice Barrett about affinity housing and your thoughts about how narrow or far-reaching a decision striking down affirmative action might be. And I guess it seems like there is the potential for at least some gray area. And you know, we run things like summer research programs that are intended to bolster diversity. There are in some cases—you just sort of mentioned the scholarship opportunities focused on increasing the number of students from underrepresented backgrounds. And I guess I'm just sort of curious if you have any speculation about how narrow or far-reaching a decision might be. NGUYEN: Thanks for that question. Yeah. So I think this was—we—prior to the—to oral arguments, people had sort of talked about this a little bit. Would this be consequential? And I—in fact, the day before—the day before oral arguments, I was on a different panel and I sort of brought this up. And actually, a federal judge in the audience came up to me afterwards and said, you know, I don't think the Court's got a lot of appetite for that. And I said, hey, I completely agree with you, but certainly, you know, we've—in recent times we've seen the Court do more interesting things, I guess, if you'll—if I can use a euphemism. And so—and so, it almost feels like everything's on the table, right? But I think, generally speaking, I'm inclined to agree that if the courts strike down race-conscious admissions, they will do it in a very narrow and highly-tailored way. That was my feeling going in. That was my feeling on October 30, right? Then, on Halloween—October 31—while listening to the—to the oral arguments, you had that very short exchange between Justice Barrett, specifically during the UNC case, ask about affinity groups and affinity housing, and it felt like it sort of came out of left field. And not—and so I think that raised some curiosity for all of us about what—about why that was a line of questioning. But nonetheless, I think at least my—I've never been a gambling person, but if I were I would say that if they do strike it down that I think the justices wholesale don't—I don't think they would have a large appetite to do something so broad and sweeping like that. At least that's my hope, if that's the direction we're moving in. But I guess that's why I said earlier that we're sort of all on pins and needles about that. And if that is struck down, then I think that's got a lot of consequences for scholarships, recruitment programs, summer bridge programs, potentially minority-serving institutions, and all of the above. So, yeah, I—again, it seems like that's a big reshaping of postsecondary education, not just in admissions but sort of the way they operate overall. And I don't know if that would happen so quickly overnight like that. But that, at least, is my hope. FASKIANOS: (Off mic.) There you go. Q: (Laughs.) Thank you so much for your talk. Clemente Abrokwaa from Penn State University. And my question is, right now there is a push for diversity, equity, and inclusion in many areas. How is that different from affirmative action? NGUYEN: Well, great question. And actually, that's a really difficult one for me to answer only because I think if we were to go and ask ten people on the street what did we mean by diversity, equity, and inclusion, everyone would give you sort of a very different and potentially narrow or a very broad definition of what it means, right? But I think with respect to affirmative action, particularly in a higher-education context, it is specifically about college admissions, specifically about admissions and how do you review college admissions. And in this case here, there is a very narrow way in which it can—it can be used for race—in this case for race, that it's got to be narrowly tailored, that it can only be a factor among a factor in a broad holistic approach, that you can't use quotas, that it can't be based on rectifying previous or historical racism, and that the only utility for it is that it is used to create learning environments where there are educational benefits that flow from diversity and the interactions of diversity. Versus, I think, broader conversations about DEI, while of course centered on admissions, right, which is sort of one of many dimensions in which you achieve DEI, right? We like to think that—and I'm going to be sort of citing a scholar, Sylvia Hurtado, out of UCLA, who argues that, admissions help contribute to one dimension, which is the composition of a university, the sort of just overall demographics and numbers of that university. But there are many other dimensions that are important in order to create learning environments in which we can achieve DEI-related issues. That means that we have to look at the institution and the way it's acted historically and contemporarily. We have to look at behavioral interactions between people on a university. There are psychological dimensions, among many others. And so that's how I think about it. I think that's how at least my area of scholarship and in our academic discipline we think about it and for folks who study education think about it. And so hopefully that answers your question. And, yeah, hopefully that answers your question. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next question from Alison Renteln: What policies appear to be the best practices to increase diversity at universities, including disability? And what are the best practices from other countries? NGUYEN: Oh, wow, that's a really good question. So we—you know, I think—I think a lot of other countries use quotas. Brazil might be sort of the example that most folks think about when they think about the way affirmative action's practiced abroad. And certainly that's not something that we can do here in the United States. So that's—that—really, really important consideration. Sort of other practices that I think that are—that are not sort of the ones that are narrowly tailored by the courts are what I said earlier about sort of what the UC system has to really do and has to really grapple with, right, are using every sort of—everything that they can think of under the sun to go out and try to do outreach and recruit and build those pipelines throughout the entire education system. There's been some work by some wonderful folks in our field—Dominique Baker, Mike Bastedo—who looked at even sort of just a random sampling, if you were able to do a lottery system, and that has actually found that that doesn't actually increase diversity either, and so—racial diversity either. And so I think that's—so, again, this all points to how crucial affirmative action is in being able to use race in order to achieve compositional diversity on a college campus, and that other proxy variables just don't even come close to being able to help estimate that. And so, yeah, that's—I should also note that really, we're only talking about a dozen or so schools. Oh, I'm sorry, more than a dozen, but a handful of schools that this is really a big issue for. Most schools in the United States don't necessarily—are not at this level of selectivity where it becomes a big issue of concern for the national public. Nearly half of all of our college-going students are at community college, which tend to be open-access institutions. And so something also to keep in mind when we talk about affirmative action. FASKIANOS: Thanks. We only have a few minutes left. Can you talk a little bit more about the work of NYU's Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools? NGUYEN: Yeah. So I'm a faculty affiliate there, and maybe I'll preface by saying I'm new to NYU. I just came here from the University of Denver, and so I'm still learning about every wonderful thing that Metro Center is doing. It's led by a wonderful faculty member here named Fabienne Doucet and really focused on sort of a handful of pillars—certainly research on education, but also a real big tie for communities. So real direct engagement with schools, school systems in order to advance justice in those schools. And so they have a lot of contracts with school districts and public entities, as well as nonprofit groups that come in and work as an incubator there on a host of issues. And so I think the work there is really exciting and really interesting. It tends to be—and I should say also very expansive. So the whole sort of K-12 system, as well as postsecondary. And I think that's the role that I'm looking to play there, is to help contribute to and expand their work in the postsecondary education space. FASKIANOS: Great. And maybe a few words about your other—you have many, many hats. NGUYEN: Oh. (Laughs.) FASKIANOS: NYU's Institute for Human Development and Social Change. NGUYEN: Yeah. They do some really wonderful, interesting work. And it's really, actually, a center and a space for faculty to come in and run a lot of their research projects, including my own, which is the MSI Data Project, where we are looking at all the various different types of minority-serving institutions in the United States, how they change over time, and how the federal government thinks about them and accounts for them, as well as how do the schools themselves think about them, all with the goal here in order to work with students of colors and give them access and opportunity. I should say, depending on how you count them, MSIs enroll a huge and significant proportion of all students of color, almost half, in the country, despite making up such a small percentage, about 20 percent, of all college and universities. And so this is—certainly when we talk about affirmative action, we—I think a lot of folks center it around racial justice or social justice. I think sort of the other side of the same coin here are schools like minority-serving institutions which enroll and provide access to and graduate a really significant proportion and number of students of color and certainly an area that we need to bring a lot more attention to when we talk about issues of race and education. FASKIANOS: OK, I'm going to take one—try to sneak in one last question from John Francis, who's raised his hand. You get the last one, John. Q: OK, can you hear me? FASKIANOS: We can. Q: Oh, that's great. So my question is—has a certain irony to it, but there's been a great deal of discussion of late that men are not succeeding in college, but that women are, and that certainly should be encouraged, but also there should be ways to find perhaps even changing when people start out in elementary school how that may be shifted to help men later on. And in this discussion, when we're looking at that issue and it's gaining some latitude, some strength, should we think about that as a possible consideration that universities should have greater latitude in making decisions to reflect the current set of demographic issues, be it race or gender or others? Has this argument come to play any kind of role? NGUYEN: Great question and a good last one, and if I can be completely honest, not an area that I'm—gender-based issues are not an area that I've done a whole lot of work in, if really any work, but I will attempt to answer your question as best as I can here, which is, I think—and sort of connected to sort of the larger conversation and question that we had that someone posed earlier about sort of the complexity and changing nature of racial and ethnic categories and what does that mean, and how do universities address that? And I think this is again where it requires universities to have some flexibility and nimbleness and autonomy to be able to address a lot of these issues, including what you're talking about, John, depending on the context and the times in which we are in. You know, certainly one big area also connected to—for men in postsecondary education is sort of the huge gap we see for men of color from particular groups, and really we see foundations, we see the Obama administration really play—invest in this work. So, John, from what it sounds like, it sounds like I agree with you here about—that universities need flexibility and autonomy to be able to address these issues. Now, that may—at the same time, we don't want to dismiss the fact that the experiences of women in postsecondary education—while certainly we see numbers increasing in enrollment in a lot of aspects, in certain disciplines we see a sharp decline; we see—in STEM and engineering fields, in the way those disciplines may be organized to sort of push out women. And so I think, again, this is why it requires some nimbleness and some autonomy from the universities to be able to design approaches to support students of different types of diversity on their campuses, in particular areas, disciplines, and majors. And so I think that's the—I think that's the challenge, is that we need to be a lot more intentional and think more precisely and run our analyses in ways that make sense for particular intersectional groups on campus and in the areas of which they're studying. So yeah, I think that's the—one of the big challenges that universities are facing today and certainly depending on how the courts rule, we'll see if that ends up restricting autonomy and removing tools or allowing those tools to remain for various types of targeted interventions for various minoritized groups. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Well, Mike Nguyen, thank you very much for this terrific hour and to all of you for your questions and comments. This is really insightful and we appreciate it. Welcome to New York, Mike, your first New York—holidays in New York. So we will be resuming the series in January and we will be sending out also the lineup for our winter/spring semester of the Academic Webinar series, which is really designed for students, later this month. We do wish you all luck with administering finals this week and grading them and all those papers; I don't envy you all. We have different deadlines under—at the Council that we're working on right now, so it will be a busy month, but we hope that everybody enjoys the holidays. We will resume in January, in the new year, and I encourage you all to follow us at @CFR_Academic on Twitter. Visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. Again, thanks, Mike, for this, and to all of you. NGUYEN: Thank you so much for having me. Really an honor. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Take care, everybody. (END)

This week on SA Voices From the Field we interviewed Art Coleman about Race Based Admissions and where we are as a country when it comes to this ever-changing landscape.  Art Coleman is a Managing Partner and co-founder of EducationCounsel LLC.  He provides policy, strategic, and legal counseling services to national non-profit organizations, postsecondary institutions, school districts and state agencies throughout the country, where he addresses issues associated with: student access, diversity, inclusion, expression, and success; faculty diversity, inclusion and expression; and institutional quality, accountability and accreditation. Mr. Coleman previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, where, in the 1990s, he led the Department's development of the Department's Title VI policy on race-conscious financial aid, as well as OCR's first comprehensive Title IX sexual harassment policy guidance.       Mr. Coleman was instrumental in the establishment of the College Board's Access and Diversity Collaborative (ADC) in 2004, which he has helped lead since its inception. He was also a member of a thought leadership panel that helped inform the development of the January 2022 report, Toward a More Equitable Future for Postsecondary Access, published by NACAC and NASFAA.  With a focus on issues of diversity and higher education admissions, he has also authored amicus briefs in: Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) & Gratz v. Bollinger (2003); Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (I and II, 2013 and 2016); and in the 2022 SFFA v. Harvard/UNC cases.  His advocacy work also includes the development of a successful federal amicus strategy and numerous federal appellate briefs on behalf of transgender students throughout the United States. Mr. Coleman is currently an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California's Rossier School of Education, where he teaches a masters level course on enrollment management law and policy.  In 2022, he received the Rossier School's Adjunct Faculty Teaching Award, with the recognition that as “one of the nation's leading legal voices supporting access, diversity and inclusion,” he “does a masterful job at simplifying complex concepts and highlighting the complexities of seemingly simple concepts.” He has testified before the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.  He is a current Executive Committee member of the Board of Directors of the National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements (NC-SARA); and he is a past member of the Board of Directors of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network); the Lab School of Washington, which serves students with learning differences; and a past chairman of the Board of Directors of the Institute for Higher Education Policy. A former litigator, Mr. Coleman is a 1984 honors graduate of Duke University School of Law and a 1981 Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Virginia.  Art Coleman shared a few links to examples of things he mentioned in the podcast: https://educationcounsel.com/?publication=engaging-campus-stakeholders-on-enrollment-issues-associated-with-student-diversity-a-communications-primer https://professionals.collegeboard.org/pdf/playbook-understanding-race-neutral-strategies.pdf Please subscribe to SA Voices from the Field on your favorite podcasting device and share the podcast with other student affairs colleagues!

In 1978, the Supreme Court allowed colleges to take race into account when crafting their incoming classes. Throughout the '80s and '90s, that's what many schools did: To get a diverse incoming class, universities used race as one factor among many. But some schools get a lot of applicants — tens of thousands of students applying for just a few thousand spots. How do you complete an individualized review of so many people? How do you make sure you consider race consistently across those tens of thousands? Is there a way to streamline the process while still complying with what Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. said the Equal Protection Clause requires? This is the second episode of UnCommon Law's three-part series about the Supreme Court's biggest affirmative action in education cases. In the first episode we looked at the 1978 case of Allan Bakke, an applicant to medical school who was denied admission. In this episode, we explore the 2003 cases of Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger. Guests include: Diego Bernal — Texas state representative and former president of the Latino Law Students Association at the University of Michigan Law School Michelle Adams — Professor at the University of Michigan Law School Greg Stohr — Supreme Court reporter for Bloomberg News Ted Shaw — Professor at the University of North Carolina, and former president of the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund Terence Pell — President of the Center for Individual Rights Marvin Krislov — President of Pace University, and former vice president and general counsel at the University of Michigan Lee Bollinger — President of Columbia University, and former president of the University of Michigan Agnes Aleobua — Principal of Citizens Academy Glenville in Cleveland, and former student intervenor at the University of Michigan Christina Rodriguez — Professor at Yale Law School and former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My guest today is Roberta Gratz, co-owner of Gratz Industries and wife of the late Donald Gratz, whose father Frank along with a business partner opened a custom metal fabrication business Treitel/Gratz in New York City in the 1920's. When Mr. Tretial moved on, Frank renamed the business Gratz Industries, Inc. and continued to fabricate sculptures, metal furniture and produce industrial design prototypes for many of the worlds top designers. Donald, Frank's younger son joined his father after finishing college and a stint in the Army.  At one point in the mid 1960's one aspect of their metal furniture business began to slow down leaving room for a unique but untested type of business. On a serendipitous afternoon in 1968, Donald while delivering a metal furniture piece to one of his customers met Romana Kryzanowska at his customer's home. Romana had needed a manufacturer for her apparatus as more and more teachers were arriving at her studio eager to learn Pilates from her and then needing apparatus to work on at home. It was this fortuitous meeting with Romana that opened a new line of business for Gratz Industries, located at that time in Long Island City, Queens - it was the birth of classical Pilates apparatus. Special thanks to KPCA-Petaluma Music credit: Summer Sidewalk by AudionautixFor more information about Gratz Industries: https://www.pilates-gratz.comFor more information about Darien Gold: https://www.dariengold.comTheme music: Soul Blues Piano Shuffle by Boom Zoom

1. Should this Court overrule Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions? 2. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act bans race-based admissions that, if done by a public university, would violate the Equal Protection Clause. Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 276 n.23 (2003). Is Harvard violating Title VI by penalizing Asian-American applicants, engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race, and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives? https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-1199.html

In Episode 104 of Totally Deep Podcast, Doug Stenclik and Randy Young of www.cripplecreekbc.com bring you the lowdown on the world of uphill and backcountry skiing and boarding. Gear, technique, fashion, jargon, guests, and assorted spray from folks who know how to earn it in the backcountry. The world's best backcountry skiing podcast. Episode 104 features an interview with OpenSnow's Joel Gratz. Often touted as a meteorological wunderkind, Gratz, like the rest of us, like sliding on snow. OpenSnow's website and app allow those seeking powder snow and forecasts to know where, when, and how deep. Gratz discusses how the site and models assisting with the forecasts have changed over the years.   On Episode 104 of the Totally Deep Podcast: 1) The impending storm. 2) The on-piste off-piste dilemma.  3) Forecasting accurately for a specific locaton.  4) The La Niña triple dip.  5) No public heat maps for backcountry spots.  6) Exloring new locations based on forecasts.  Have a listen and get ready for the impending vert and lovely descents. Thanks for listening and joining us for the 2022-2023 season.  And remember: be safe out there.  More info about TDP at Totally Deep Podcast Blog on Cripplecreekbc.com or wildsnow.com. Comments: info@cripplecreekbc.com. Or leave a voicemail: 970-510-0450 Backcountry Skiing, Uphill Skiing, Rando (skimo?) Racing, Splitboarding, it's all uphill from here.  

After a hiatus from podcasting, we're back sharing stories of awesome entrepreneurs and professionals! Heading into the holiday weekend, I'm talking with Joe Gratz, CEO + Owner of the hottest new food trend to hit the Jersey shore. It's Cape May County's first and only floating food boat, Sandbar Joes. I set sail to get a behind the scenes look at this hot dog operation with 60 - 90% profit margins! Watch the full episode to see our adventure on the water and learn about this "hot" new business. Like, Subscribe, turn on Notifications, and then go back to work! Because This Blonde Means Business Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Facebook Follow Host Natasha Filipov on Instagram Read the blog Follow Sandbar Joes on Instagram Edited by Stephanie Filippo

AGRIBUSINESS REPORT PODCAST – Guest: Andy Gratz is with Alta Seeds in Amarillo and talks about some of the challenges producers faced in 2022 and previews an upcoming Field Day … Read More

In this episode of Bourbon With Friends. The crew sit down with Co-Owner of Bluegrass Distillers Ben Franzini and Director of Marketing & Distribution Maggie Young. Bluegrass Distillers is a craft distillery soon to be located in Midway Kentucky. Established in 2012. It is best known for its Kentucky blue corn bourbon. They also just recently launched their newest product line of Midway Distilling.  When Bluegrass Distillers were considering relocating their distillery to Midway, they quickly learned of the rich distilling history of our new home.The original Midway Distilling Company operated from 1916 to 1920 in Midway, KY, Kentucky's first railroad town. Production was suspended by the Food and Fuel Control Act. Midway Distilling barrels were then bottled as medicinal spirits until 1924 when the distillery and its remaining inventory were destroyed by fire. The city of Midway was founded after Colonel John Francsico sold his 216 acre farm to the L&O Railroad Company in 1835. The original “distillery district” of Midway aka Lot 25, where several distilleries operated 1865-1877, was then moved to the Northeast corner of Dudley & Gratz, which eventually became home to the original Midway Distilling Company. During this time, the main water source for the distilleries in the area was Lee's Branch, an off-shoot of the Elkhorn Creek. Fast forward to 2021, the Midway Distilling name has been Reclaimed as a line of barrel aged rye whiskeysThe team at Bluegrass Distillers is committed to reviving the rich 155 year history of distilling in Midway by using the finest grains and time-honored methods to produce the finest finished whiskeys.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Fudge Kitchen - In business for over 50 years. Fudge Kitchen ships delicious fudge, chocolates and sweet treats all across the USA. Fudge kitchen makes a perfect gift or decadent snack at all hours of the day! Check out their website - https://fudgekitchens.com/Blind Barrels - Blind Whiskey Tasting Kit that was born to disrupt the whiskey industry by showcasing American craft whiskey that don't make their way to liquor store shelves due to distribution limitations. Blind tastings are all about discovery, education, and removing brand bias, and Blind Barrels hits home with whiskey communities by supporting the very best in smaller distillers who are making the most amazing, innovative, and delicious products that you can't get at your liquor store.Instagram - blindbarrelswww.blindbarrels.com

Are there countries, races, or ethnicities with higher or lower rates of self-injury?  How prevalent is NSSI among indigenous peoples, and what role does culture play in the form, function, and meaning of self-injury?  In this episode, Dr. Marc Wilson from Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington in Aotearoa New Zealand shares about cross-cultural representations of self-injury and self-harm.  Learn more about Dr. Wilson and his work at https://people.wgtn.ac.nz/Marc.Wilson. Below are links to some of the research referenced in this episode:Sansone, R. A., Wiederman, M. W., & Sansone, L.A. (1998). The Self-Harm Inventory (SHI): development of a scale for identifying self-destructive behaviors and borderline personality disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54(7), 973–983.Sansone, R. A., & Sansone, L. A. (2010). Measuring self-harm behavior with the Self-Harm Inventory. Psychiatry (Edgmont), 7(4), 16-20.Gratz, K. L. (2001). Measurement of deliberate self-harm: Preliminary data on the Deliberate Self-Harm Inventory. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 23(4), 253-263.Monto, M. A., McRee, N., & Deryck, F. S. (2018). Nonsuicidal self-injury among a representative sample of US adolescents, 2015. American Journal of Public Health, 108, 1042-1048.Favazza, A. R. (2011). Bodies under siege: Self-mutilation, nonsuicidal self-injury, and body modification in culture and psychiatry (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Wilson, M. S. (in press). Cross-cultural representations of nonsuicidal self-injury. In E. E. Lloyd-Richardson, I. Baetens, & J. Whitlock (Eds.), The handbook of nonsuicidal self-injury. Oxford University Press.Follow Dr. Westers on Instagram and Twitter (@DocWesters). To join ISSS, visit itriples.org and follow ISSS on Facebook and Twitter (@ITripleS).The Psychology of Self-Injury podcast has been rated #5 by Feedspot in their "Best 20 Clinical Psychology Podcasts" and by Welp Magazine in their "20 Best Injury Podcasts."