Diane Ravitch - Reign of Error - YouTube

Diane Ravitch - Reign of Error - YouTube:

Diane Ravitch is Research Professor of Education at New York University and a historian of education.



Diane Ravitch’s Blog is dianeravitch.net and has received more that 17 million hits in 30 months.



From 1991 to 1993, she was Assistant Secretary of Education and Counselor to Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. She was responsible for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement in the U.S. Department of Education. As Assistant Secretary, she led the federal effort to promote the creation of voluntary state and national academic standards.



From 1997 to 2004, she was a member of the National Assessment Governing Board, which oversees the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the federal testing program. She was appointed by the Clinton administration’s Secretary of Education Richard Riley in 1997 and reappointed by him in 2001. From 1995 until 2005, she held the Brown Chair in Education Studies at the Brookings Institution and edited Brookings Papers on Education Policy. Before entering government service, she was Adjunct Professor of History and Education at Teachers College, Columbia University.



She has lectured in Poland, the former Czechoslovakia, the Czech Republic, Romania, the former Soviet Union, Hungary, the former Yugoslavia, Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, and throughout the United States. Her lectures on democracy and civic education have been translated by the USIA into many languages, including Polish, Spanish, Lithuanian, Latvian, Russian, Belarussian, and Ukrainian. Her books have been translated into many languages, including Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, Swedish, and Japanese.



In 1989, she advised Teachers Solidarity and the Ministry of Education in Poland. In 1991, the Polish Government awarded her a medal for her work on behalf of Solidarity.



She was elected to membership in the National Academy of Education (1979); the Society of American Historians (1984); the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1985); and as the Eleanor Roosevelt Fellow of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences (2002). She was selected as a Phi Beta Kappa Visiting Scholar in 1984-85, the first person chosen from the field of education studies. She was awarded the Henry Allen Moe prize in the humanities by the American Philosophical Society in 1986. In 1988, she was designated an “honorary citizen of the state of California” by the State Legislature in recognition of her contributions to the state’s history curriculum and its human rights curriculum. In 1989, she received the Wellesley College Alumnae Achievement Award. She was honored as a Literary Lion by the New York Public Library in 1992. The Library of Congress invited her to deliver lectures in 1993 in honor of the 250th birthday of Thomas Jefferson. She received the Leadership Award of the Klingenstein Institute at Teachers College in 1994 and the Horace Kidger Award of the New England History Teachers Association in 1998.



In 2004, she received the Leadership Award of the New York City Council of Supervisors and Administrators. In 2005, she received the John Dewey award from the United Federation of Teachers of New York City; the Gaudium Award of the Breukelein Institute; and the Uncommon Book Award from the Hoover Institution. In 2006, the Kenneth J. Bialkin/Citigroup Public Service Award was conferred on her.



In 2010, the National Education Association selected her as its “Friend of Education” for the year, and the New England Association of Schools and Colleges conferred its Charles W. Eliot Award on Dr. Ravitch. In 2011, she has been honored with the Outstanding Friend of Education Award from the Horace Mann League; the American Education Award from the American Association of School Administrators; the National Association of Secondary School Principals’ Distinguished Service Award; and the Distinguished Alumni Award from Teachers College at Columbia University. In June of 2011, she received the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Prize of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.





A native of Houston, she is a graduate of the Houston public schools. She received a B.A. from Wellesley College in 1960 and a Ph.D. in history from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in 1975.

Diane Ravitch - Reign of Error - YouTube:

The Problem With 'D' Grades: Mediocrity in High School and Limited Prospects for College - The Atlantic

The Problem With 'D' Grades: Mediocrity in High School and Limited Prospects for College - The Atlantic:

The Problem With Ds

Why the letter grade should be banned from schools

“They sit there and blink. They approach sub-mediocrity,” says a former coworker when I ask her to describe her “D students.” She’s only partially joking.

Getting an F typically requires some combination of compulsive truancy, a keen distaste for holding a pen, and problems outside of school. An F leads to summer school or an online course, and unrepentant F students tend to drop out or head to an alternative school before long. Fs are a serious problem in education.

D students, however, often stick around and cause another serious problem: They may pass, but they learn close to nothing along the way. Plus, they have little chance of attending a four-year college out of high school. A D student may flake on at least one major assignment a semester but breezily make up minor reading quizzes two months after they were originally administered. Maybe he shows up—but only after sauntering in 10 minutes late. Maybe he doesn’t ask for help and casually breaks appointments for tutoring. Rarely reading and occasionally despairing (with a smile) that he “can’t understand the book,” the D student probably falls behind early and catches up late. But not too late to prevent that bad grade from morphing into a worse one—and not wholeheartedly enough to get the C or B he’s likely capable of earning. This D student knows exactly what he needs to do to avoid an F before grades are due.

If Ds are markers of adequacy that everyone recognizes as inadequate, doling them out seems illogical and cynical.

Fs are rare in my 10th- and 12th-grade public-school literature classes. While I would like for Ds to be rare, too, 18 percent of my students earned one by the end of the spring semester.

Unlike the few who got Fs, they received the same amount of credit on their transcripts as did anyone with an A, B, or C. They just probably won’t be going to a selective college (at least any time soon). In California, where I teach, state universities from Berkeley to Chico State don’t admit any student who got a D in a prerequisite core class, like algebra. And most reputable private colleges across the country set similar expectations.

As educators, politicians, pundits, and parents debate the logic of Common Core testing and deliberate how to best hold teachers accountable, inspire students, and improve educational opportunities for American kids, it seems The Problem With 'D' Grades: Mediocrity in High School and Limited Prospects for College - The Atlantic:

PRIVATIZED Substitute teachers angry with company

Substitute teachers angry with company:

Substitute teachers angry with company

RETIRED TEACHER Linda MacNeal is no longer a member of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, but yesterday she found herself back in the union's office to vent.

The school district's new system of placing substitute teachers had been introduced at a morning informational session, prompting frustration and anger among some teachers over a cut in compensation.

The new per-diem rates teachers would earn under Source4Teachers is "just insulting to me. And it says that [the company] doesn't value teachers," said MacNeal, who worked for the district for 34 years.

The School Reform Commission approved a three-year, $34 million contract earlier this month with the Cherry Hill firm Source4Teachers and moved on from their longtime partner, the PFT.

District officials say the move would save $2 million per year and increase the number of teachers in empty classrooms.

The PFT, meanwhile, has filed an Unfair Labor practice against the district and the SRC, claiming it did not bargain in good faith.

Source4Teachers, which will lease space inside district headquarters, "will pay the market rate" for substitute teachers, said district spokesman Fernando Gallard.

Company spokesman Owen Murphy said certified teachers, any grade, will be paid $90 per day; non-certified teachers, any grade, will be paid $75. And special-education positions pay the highest rate at $110 per day. Any certified teacher who takes a special-education position does not have to be certified in special education, Murphy said.

"We feel that the rates we are offering are comparable to neighboring school districts," he said.

Under the PFT contract, the substitute teacher daily rates were: $75 per day for certified teachers who had worked 22 days or less. After that, their daily rate shot up to $160; $209 to $239 per day for retired teachers, depending on their educational degrees and college credits; and $212 to $242 per day for retired special ed teachers. Non-certified teachers earned $47.63 for the first 22 days and then the amount increased to about $126 per day under the PFT contract.

Seventy-two percent of the PFT's 400 substitute teachers were paid at the higher rate, Gallard said.

Retired teacher Kenneth Schamberg says the district promised something else.

"They assured the teachers that their pay would be 'similar,' that was the word they used," Schamberg said. "Since when is a 61.9 percent pay cut similar?" He walked out of the morning meeting, in frustration, he said.

"I love what I do, but all of a sudden they're pulling the rug out from under us," he said.

Gallard said Source4Teachers will improve the 55 to 65



Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20150630_Substitute_teachers_angry_with_company.html#IKAsEc5PpfWWzL0s.99

Sorry, Walmart: Charter Schools Won't Fix Poverty

Sorry, Walmart: Charter Schools Won't Fix Poverty:

Sorry, Walmart: Charter Schools Won't Fix Poverty

The Walton Family Foundation may not want to raise wages or lose tax breaks, but education reform alone can't reduce income inequality.

Last week, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and In the Public Interest released a highly critical report on the Walton Family Foundation’s K-12 education philanthropy, which ended with a call for increased transparency and accountability in the charter sector. The gist of the report is that the Walton Family Foundation—which has kick-started about one in four charters around the country—“relentlessly presses for rapid growth of privatized education options” and has opposed serious efforts to regulate and monitor fraud and abuse. While the foundation supports rapidly scaling up charter networks that have produced promising results, the AFT and In the Public Interest cite a 2013 Moody’s Investment Services report which found that dramatically expanding charter schools in poor urban areas weakens the ability of traditional schools to serve their students, forcing them to lay off teachers, increase class sizes, and cut programs to make ends meet.

A month earlier, Philamplify, an initiative of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP), published its own report on the Walton Family Foundation’s impact, and found that although they have achieved meaningful results through their environmental philanthropy, “an overreliance on specific market-based vehicles” hinders their ability to create “sustainable and equitable” improvements in education. Philamplify also criticized the Walton Family Foundation for “insulating itself among like-minded peers rather than connecting with the broader field.”

While the Walton Family Foundation did not return my request for comment, Education Week reported that their spokesperson, Daphne Moore, defended their commitment to high-quality schools. Education Week also cites Greg Richmond, the president of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA)—an organization that receives funding from the Walton Family Foundation—who argued that the foundation has long demonstrated a commitment to accountability and transparency.

This discussion is sure to continue over the coming months, but what was particularly striking was something in the Walton Family Foundation’s response to the Philamplify report—a statement that has been reiterated by the foundation many times over the past several years. Marc Sternberg, the foundation’s K-12 program director, said, “Education is the set of work we can support that will most directly end the cycle of poverty and change the trajectory of young people’s lives.”

The notion that education is needed to break the cycle of poverty is a popular mantra of the education reform movement. The problem is, it is simply not true at all. The most direct way to break the cycle of poverty is actually to give poor people more money, something that high-quality educations, even college degrees, do not in any way guarantee. So when it comes to the question of redistribution—an integral component to any comprehensive anti-poverty program—the political work of the Walton family deserves far greater scrutiny.

Waltons, Walmart, and Politics

The Walton family heirs own a majority of public shares in Walmart, the U.S.’s largest private employer, which easily makes them some of the richest people on earth. Today, the Walton family has more wealth than 49 million American families combined. The six Walton heirs together have a net worth of at least $148.8 billion.

The Walton family engages in quite a bit of political work outside of its environmental and education philanthropy—much of it to advance conservative legislative goals. In the 2014 electoral cycle, Walmart spent $2.4 million through its PAC and individual donations, and $12.5 million through lobbying. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Walmart was far and away the biggest big-box retail spender in the election cycle, and has been ranked among the top 100 political donors since 1989. Demos looked at the Walton family’s political contributions between 2000 and 2014 and found that their $7.3 million in campaign contributions heavily favored Republican candidates over Democrats.

Outside of political campaigns, Walmart employs an array of Washington, D.C., lobbyists to advocate on issues like labor, taxes, and trade. Up until May 2012, Walmart was a longtime member of the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which works to promote an ideologically conservative agenda around the country. Moreover Walmart has given millions to the Republican State Leadership Committee, the Republican Governors Association, and other organizations that push right-wing policies.

Their animus towards union and labor is no secret, and Walmart has fought Sorry, Walmart: Charter Schools Won't Fix Poverty:

The Waldorf Way: A Waldorf perspective on the Common Core State Standards

The Waldorf Way: A Waldorf perspective on the Common Core State Standards:

The Waldorf Way: A Waldorf perspective on the Common Core State Standards

By Huntington Barclay

Founding father Thomas Jefferson maintained that if the federal government intruded into — and standardized education, diversity in ways of thinking would disappear and democracy would die. Looking at the educational landscape today suggests to many that this may indeed be happening now.

History: For more than 50 years the federal government in the United States has steadily increased its influence in the field of education. The 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was part of Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty. It provided standardized testing and funding only within certain standards of accessibility. For more than four decades it was renewed every five years.  Then Bill Clinton expanded its reach.

George Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 reiterated Clinton’s goals and reauthorized the ESEA. NCLB increased the restraints on federal funding and expanded the federal role, requiring standardized annual testing, national report cards and standardized teacher qualifications. Like Clinton’s Goals 2000, but more comprehensive in purview, NCLB paid the states if they would increase early academics, introduce educational technology and use standardized tests to monitor and demonstrate student progress.

In 2010 Secretary of Education Arne Duncan introduced a set of restrictive state standards which came to be known as Common Core State Standards. The standards are well written, well referenced and well intentioned, but they are more than just standards. 

CCSS is a detailed list of what students in all grades, from kindergarten through grade 12, should be able to learn and do in mathematics, English, language skills and social studies.

In recent months many parent and teacher groups have complained about the CCSS and this latest intrusion of the federal government and corporations into education. Parents are concerned about the effect the standards are having on their children. The state of Louisiana is suing the department of education and the executive office for seizing control of education without constitutional justification. West Virginia has just repealed it’s acceptance of CCSS.

The Waldorf perspective: The perspective of Waldorf Education would question the underlying assumption of Common Core — that government should play a leading role in determining how children are educated.

Rudolf Steiner (founder of Waldorf) saw human society as comprising three distinct spheres of activity: 1) the political or “rights” sphere; 2) the economic sphere; and 3) the spiritual/cultural sphere. Each operates most effectively when independent, not impinging on the others, or being impinged on. 

Steiner placed education within the cultural sphere and thus believed it should be able to operate in total freedom. Government is part of the “rights” sphere and should not intrude into education. Economics, where the immediate, appropriate goal is financial profit, also should not be involved in forming educational policy. In the drafting of Common Core however, both the federal government and prominent corporations were highly-involved. Since the announcement of standards, by no coincidence, many expensive related products have appeared — books, webinars, software programs, apps, courses and blogs — offering help in succeeding with CCSS. The corporate world has too often been eager to profit by what it helped to create.

There are today a number of Waldorf-inspired charter schools that receive government funding. But experience indicates that such arrangements usually lead to increasing external monitoring and controls, as well as rules and prohibitions against the very things that distinguish Waldorf Education.                    

Earlier is not better: Another concern is the “earlier the better” attitude that permeates Common Core. Government standards stipulate that academic learning should begin in kindergarten and become more intense with each grade. At the heart of Waldorf education is the idea that the child grows in distinct developmental stages. The young child is not ready for demanding intellectual work.  Premature academics can permanently skew healthy holistic development. Throughout the grades Common Core seems to demand of the students more performance intellectually than appropriate. The predominant call for the use of computers and other technology from the early grades on is one symptom. 

Different standards of success: The focus on standardized tests as a way of measuring the success of the student (and of the teacher) is also problematic. Waldorf education is not only about skill development and the acquisition of knowledge.  It is certainly not about educating children to be cogs in a successful national economy competing in the world markets. Waldorf education seeks to help students become and wonder, as well as nurturing a keen interest in the world around them. The success of such an education simply cannot be measured by a standardized test.

If this article resonates with you as a parent, consider visiting The White Mountain Waldorf School in Albany to see for yourself what the school can offer your child. Contact Enrollment Director, Denice Tepe at (603) 447-3168 or email Outreach@WhiteMountainWaldorf.org.

Huntington Barclay is a dedicated Waldorf parent. He referenced from an article in Renewal, A Journal for Waldorf Education, vol. 24 #1, by Patrice Maynard.The Waldorf Way: A Waldorf perspective on the Common Core State Standards:

School District Privatization Threat Thwarted by Community-Supported, Union-Led Campaign - NEA Today

School District Privatization Threat Thwarted by Community-Supported, Union-Led Campaign - NEA Today:

School District Privatization Threat Thwarted by Community-Supported, Union-Led Campaign

L-R: Drew Campbell, Teddie Watson, and Heather Madigan stand with signs used to gather support for their efforts. The MEA and supporters were successful in thwarting an attempt to outsource almost 200 ESP jobs in Waterford, Mich. (Jose Juarez/Special to the NEA)

Over the last several decades, Andrew Campbell has given many school board presentations, workshop trainings, and media interviews about the futility ofprivatizing public school services. Colleagues say that “privatization” is his signature word if not his middle name.

“I use that word a lot,” says Campbell, a custodian with the Waterford School District for 28 years and member of the Michigan Education Association (MEA) Statewide Anti-privatization (SWAP) Committee.

SWAP provides anti-privatization training and assists MEA local Associations threatened with outsourcing.

Last March, Campbell and two other SWAP members were conducting a typical training workshop in Bellaire, Michigan. It was titled, “Defending our Careers: How to Stop Privatization Through Coalition Building and Community Connections.”

“It was Friday the 13th,” Campbell recalls. “A colleague from Waterford (210 miles away) called to tell me that our superintendent had just announced in a private meeting that he was putting out bids to privatize almost 200 jobs.”

One of those jobs was Campbell’s.

Despite the bad omen and devastating news, Campbell knew that members of Waterford’s Michigan Education Support Personnel Association III (MESPA) could rally the community and beat back school privatization. Which they did, but it wasn’t easy.

“I knew we wouldn’t panic,” he says. “We’d organize.”

Within 48 hours of hearing the news, executive committee members of MESPA III (custodians, maintenance/transportation and food service workers) got together and established the Waterford Education Support Professional (ESP) Crisis Committee.

Campbell was named chairman. Also present were MEA UniServ Director Marcy Felegy and Troy Beasley, president of the teacher’s Waterford Education Association (WEA). Since the school board was scheduled to vote on the school privatization issue at a May 21 board meeting, time was of essence.

MESPA leaders quickly decided to follow anti-privatization action plans created by the National Education Association (NEA), MEA and the SWAP team, which is comprised of members from several ESP job groups, higher education, and K-12 teachers.

“I was not going to lose my job without doing something about it,” says Heather Madigan, a custodial engineer at Beaumont Elementary School who volunteered to join the crisis team. “It was extremely helpful to have experienced people on the team. We got right to work.”

During this time, school district officials also pounced. They immediately began accepting bids from private companies to provide services for 187 school support jobs in transportation (67), custodial (65) and childcare services (41), and maintenance (14). In addition, officials announced that one transportation and two custodial supervisors were being released as of July 1.

“We hadn’t had a raise in seven years and have accepted many concessions over School District Privatization Threat Thwarted by Community-Supported, Union-Led Campaign - NEA Today:

Brought To You By Wal-Mart? How the Walton Foundation’s Ideological Pursuit is Damaging Charter Schooling

Brought To You By Wal-Mart? How the Walton Family Foundation’s Ideological Pursuit is Damaging Charter Schooling - Cashing in on Kids:

There was a sour breeze blowing through the nation’s charter schools in 2014.

Twenty-five years into our nation’s experiment with independently operated, publicly funded charter schools, the news didn’t look good: In May, a new report revealed more than $100 million in fraud, waste and abuse in just 15 of the 43 states that allow charters. (A year later, the report was updated, and the figure rose to $200 million.) Some of the stories defy belief: a school in Philadelphia that was doubling as a nightclub after hours; school operators embezzling millions to pay for high-flying lifestyles; real estate developers cashing in by using public funds to leverage sweet deals on millions of dollars’ worth of property. One after another, the stories emerged. And public officials around the country began to call for change.

In Connecticut, the state Department of Education announced new policies to govern oversight of the state’s charter sector.1 In New York, the charter lobby continued a seven-year fight to prevent the state comptroller from auditing charter schools.2 In Pennsylvania, the auditor general called the charter sector “a mess.”3

How did an idea that promised small-scale innovation as a way to improve the education outcomes of disadvantaged children become a massive industry of more than 6,000 schools, spending upward of $20 billion from taxpayers a year, despite demonstrating no significant academic gains for students?

A significant share of the blame lies at the feet of the Walton Family Foundation (WFF), the Arkansas-based philanthropic arm of the family that brought us Wal-Mart.

When it comes to public education, the Walton Family Foundation is the largest philanthropic donor in the U.S. after the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Gates also supports charter schools, but the Walton Family Foundation ($164 million in education grants in 2013) stands out because of its uncompromisingly ideological approach to public education and its strong support for policy advocacy in line with that approach. And as the tower of cards began to shake, it is the Walton Family Foundation that—more than any other—should take the blame.

This report explores the radical agenda of the Walton family and the foundation it controls, and how that agenda has taken the U.S. charter school movement away from education quality in favor of a strategy focused only on growth. Under the guise of “choice” to improve schools for low-income children, WFF has supported the unregulated growth of a privatized education industry— quantity over quality, and “freedom” over regulation. It’s been lucrative for some, but a disaster for many of the nation’s most vulnerable students and school districts.

THE WAL-MART WAY: INTENSELY IDEOLOGICAL AND MARKET-DRIVEN

“Charters are competitors. They steal customers, deplete revenues and increase costs. When charters siphon off kids, they not only take the money that comes with them, they often cause nearby schools to operate under capacity.”

Sam Walton and his brother, Bud, founded Wal-Mart and got rich. Really rich. Sam Walton and his wife Helen’s four children (along with their families) now share in what is estimated to be a collective worth of $150 billion. Of the 10 richest Americans according to Forbes magazine, four are members of the Walton family.

The Walton Family Foundation was established in 1988 and is based in Bentonville, Ark., the home of Wal-Mart.

The late John Walton, who died when the small plane he was piloting crashed in Wyoming in 2005, his widow Christy, and brother, Jim Walton, shared in the leadership of the family foundation. John, more than the others, crafted the foundation’s agenda. Carrie Walton Penner, the daughter of Sam Walton’s eldest son Rob, and her husband, Greg Penner, have also been instrumental in the family’s education work, sitting on the boards of numerous education advocacy and charter organizations and giving generously to the political campaigns of like-minded politicians from their $20 million home in Atherton, Calif. Alice Walton, the youngest of Sam and Helen’s four children, is best known as an arts collector. But she, too, doesn’t hesitate to lay down some cash in the political arena when the family’s education agenda is at stake.

The foundation’s stated mission is to infuse public education with competitive pressure through school choice. The theory is based in retail: If consumers have options, they will choose either higher quality or cheaper products. Merchants who can’t compete will go out of business, opening up space for new entrepreneurs to enter. Through this constant churn of options, the theory holds, quality will improve across the board. In public education, that means flooding the market with schools, aggressively closing those that are labeled as “failing,” and opening up pathways to allow new school operators to take their place.

The Walton Family Foundation holds this theory dear, and has relentlessly pressed for the rapid growth of privatized education options (vouchers and charters) and against any government intervention (read: regulation) that might deter entry into the education market by anyone with an idea to try out.

Although the foundation implies that this market-based model will lead to the improvement of all schools in a system, a different endgame is clear through its philanthropic portfolio: The foundation endorses the eventual elimination of public education altogether, in favor of an across-the-board system of privately operated schools.

If the principals of the Walton Family Foundation decline to state publicly that their press for deregulation and rapid expansion is designed to undermine and eventually dismantle public education, their grantees have been more than willing to do so:

“Charters are competitors. They steal customers, deplete revenues and increase costs. When charters siphon off kids, they not only take the money that comes with them, they often cause nearby schools to operate under capacity. This increases inefficiencies and per-student costs because all that empty space still must be maintained.

As charters continue to expand, they will force districts to make more and more tough choices on personnel, closing schools and redrawing attendance boundaries, both political poisons. We are seeing this play out in spectacular fashion in some older urban areas.”4

That’s Mike Thomas of the Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE) arguing that Florida should allow more rapid expansion of the charter sector not despite, but because of the “spectacular” negative impact this expansion is having on traditional public schools and the children who remain in them. Founded by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, FEE has received more than $4.8 million from the Walton Family Foundation since 2009.

But the most chilling articulation of the Walton agenda came in a 2008 article published in EducationNext.5 The article, called “Wave of the Brought To You By Wal-Mart? How the Walton Family Foundation’s Ideological Pursuit is Damaging Charter Schooling - Cashing in on Kids:

Part 2 ON Vacation But ...

PART 2 ON Vacation But ...

I Will Be Checking When I Can!

Having a Little Problem With the Laptop!

Hope You Are Having Fun Too!