get discount viagra online buy viagra online no prescription online viagra in u s buy viagra Vacuum devices - There are several different devices. Basically, you put your penis into a plastic container. A pump then sucks out the air from the container to create a vacuum. This causes blood to be drawn into the penis and cause an erection. When erect, a rubber band is placed at the base of the penis to maintain the erection. The plastic container is then taken off the penis and the penis remains erect until the rubber band is removed (which must be removed within 30 minutes). How is erectile dysfunction treated? ED is primarily treated by tackling the cause of the problem, whether this is physical or psychological. The narrowing of the arteries (called atherosclerosis) is one of the most common causes of ED. In these cases your GP may suggest lifestyle changes, such as losing weight, to try to reduce your risk of cardiovascular disease. This may help to relieve your symptoms as well as improving your general health. You may also be given medication to treat atherosclerosis, such as cholesterol-lowering statins and drugs to reduce your blood pressure. What Doctors Treat ED? The type of medical specialist who treats ED will depend on the cause of the problem. Based on your family's medical history as well as your own medical history and current health, your doctor may treat you with oral medications such as Viagra or similar drugs. If this fails, he or she may refer you to a urologist or psychologist. cialis online discount buy cialis online g postmessage viagra subject online kamagra online without prescription quick forum readtopic cialis signature online cheap cialis Order cialis cialis online best order cialis buy cialis online buy cialis without prescription online viagra in u s buy viagra cheap cialis online online buy cialis without prescription The risk of developing heart attacks or abnormal heart rhythms during sex is low in men with well-controlled hypertension, mild disease of the heart valves, well-controlled heart failure, mild and stable angina (with a favorable treadmill stress test), successful coronary stenting or bypass surgery, and a remote history of heart attack (more than eight weeks previously). Sildenafil can be used safely in men in these low-risk groups. What is normal penis anatomy? The penis contains two chambers, called the corpora cavernosa, which run the length of the upper side of the penis (see figure 1 below). The urethra, which is the channel for urine and ejaculate, runs along the underside of the corpora cavernosa. Filling the corpora cavernosa is a spongy tissue consisting of smooth muscles, fibrous tissues, spaces, veins, and arteries. A membrane, called the tunica albuginea, surrounds the corpora cavernosa. Veins located in the tunica albuginea drain blood out of the penis. buy cialis doctor online buy cialis Levitra Online from certified pharmacy. Free shipping, 24/7 online customer support, Extra free bonus pills, Superb Service and satisfaction is 100% buy levitra discount viagra cialis levitra online canada buy canadian cialis Metabolism (breakdown) of sildenafil is slowed by aging, liver and kidney dysfunction, and concurrent use of certain medications (such as erythromycin -- an antibiotic, and protease inhibitors, for HIV). Slowed breakdown allows sildenafil to accumulate in the body and potentially may increase the risk of side effects. Therefore in men over 65, in men with substantial kidney and liver disease, and in men who also are taking protease inhibitors, the doctor will initiate sildenafil at a lower dose (25 mg) to avoid accumulation of sildenafil in the body. A protease inhibitor ritonavir (Norvir) is especially potent in increasing the accumulation of sildenafil, thus men who are taking Norvir should not take sildenafil doses higher than 25 mg and at a frequency of no greater than once in 48 hours. cialis drugstore buy cialis without prescription Today to order a preparation viagra online is any more a problem. buy viagra online order 5mg cialis online order cialis online Treatment for erectile dysfunction on the NHS: The Department of Health states: "From 1 July 1999 only those patients suffering from one of the specified medical conditions are eligible to receive drug treatments for impotence on the NHS. Other men can receive a private prescription from their own GP." viagra online generic generic viagra online cialis online pharmacy buy cialis
STATE: SBAM president: Health insurance will make employers attractive (advocates RTW in article) http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2012/11/20/news/doc50aba65883ef4610971743.txt?viewmode=fullstory
Steve Harry: Breaking away from labor unions (Not about RTW, so much as anti-union. Calls for Dems to break from Labor) http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20121121/OPINION02/311210008/Steve-Harry-Breaking-away-from-labor-unions?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s
Letter writers sound off about right-to-work, deer hunting, and the Republican brand http://www.mlive.com/opinion/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2012/11/letter_writers_sound_off_about_2.html
Editorial: Rush to school reform likely to get it wrong http://www.freep.com/article/20121120/OPINION01/121120056/Editorial-Rush-to-school-reform-in-Legislature-likely-to-get-it-wrong?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
Michigan State School Board raises objections to education authority bill http://www.freep.com/article/20121120/NEWS06/121120050/Michigan-State-School-Board-raises-objections-education-authority-bill
Commentary: Michigan's education future http://www.michiganradio.org/post/commentary-michigan-s-education-future
Michigan legislators seeking to create 'Wild West' of unregulated schools? http://www.michiganradio.org/post/michigan-legislators-seeking-create-wild-west-unregulated-schools
MASSP Analysis of SB 1358 and HB 6004 http://mymassp.com/files/EAA%20analysis-11.18.12.pdf
(Additional full Gongwer article on EAA/Charter Expansion/Parent Trigger at the end)
Emergency manager question taken to Michigan Supreme Court http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2012/11/emergency_manager_question_tak.html#incart_river_default
(Same story is also up on HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/20/emergency-manager-questio_n_2164777.html )
(Karla Swift Detroit News Op-Ed) Gov must stop right-to-work push in lame duck http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121121/OPINION03/211210312#ixzz2CrQ2OKH6
Michigan Conference AAUP Political Action Center
The Michigan Conference AAUP Political Action Committee was formed in January of 2012 after years of repeated disinvestment in higher education by the legislature and elected officials. The goals of the MI-AAUP PAC are two-fold:
1. to assist in electing advocates for higher education at the State office level.
2. to qualify, pass or defeat a ballot question.
The MI-AAUP PAC will collect voluntary contributions from AAUP members throughout the State of Michigan. It is not necessary for you to be affiliated with a Chapter. Contributions will be used to support candidates who have a proven record of supporting higher education issues and those candidates who commit to supporting higher education issues.
All money that is collected by the MI-AAUP PAC must be used for supporting candidates for elected office.
Quality Higher Education for the 21st Century
Perhaps the most widely accepted belief about higher education today is that our nation will need more college- educated people in the future than we have now or than we are on track to produce. This belief, given greater urgency by the most recent economic recession, has increasingly led to calls for transforming higher education and for embracing a wide variety of “innovations.”
Without question, improving higher education to expand access and student success should be a goal of everyone--the public, elected leaders, businesses, and those who work to provide that education.
But as conversations about specifics develop, it is crucial for discussion about change to be guided by principles that will lead us toward real improvement in American higher education. Wholesale embrace of change without careful thought and deliberation can take us in the wrong direction--not toward reforming higher education but, in fact, toward deforming precisely those aspects of American higher education that have made it the envy of the world.
There are surely no simple answers, no one model, and no “magic bullets” for meeting America’s needs for broadly accessible quality higher education; but we believe that the following principles can provide a helpful framework for developing and assessing proposals for innovation or restructuring in the future.
1. Higher Education in the 21st Century must be inclusive; it should be available to and affordable for all who can benefit from and want a college education.
Demographic projections make it clear that the United States will not return to world leadership in higher education attainment without increasing higher education opportunities and success for all sectors of our increasingly diverse society. A vigorous democracy and a thriving economy in the future demand that we give this principle full attention when we consider proposals for change, seeking out changes that will enhance educational opportunity and success for all students, including low-income communities and communities of color, and rejecting any proposals that may have unintended negative consequences for access and success.
We simply cannot risk a return to earlier times when education was rationed on the basis of race and economic status.
For this principle to be realized, higher education must also be recognized as a right and a public good rather than as a privilege and primarily a private good. High tuition, inadequate financial aid, and burdensome levels of student debt might seem more acceptable when we focus on the advantages higher education brings to the individual, but our current approach of increasing the costs of college restricts access for individuals and dampens the broader social and economic benefits of higher education.
2. The curriculum for a quality 21st Century higher education must be broad and diverse.
Our economy demands a population that is broadly educated for critical thinking and innovation. Narrow job training alone can condemn graduates to dead-end paths-- in low-wage jobs , unable to repay their student loans, and ill-equipped to adjust to changing job markets and careers.
The value of a broad and diverse curriculum extends beyond economics. In the increasingly interconnected world of the 21st century, we will need more people who understand its history, who can think outside of narrow boundaries, and who have the tools to function in a culturally diverse environment.
Our democracy needs a broadly educated citizenry. Civic participation cannot flourish when a liberal education is reserved for the elite, and narrow training is provided for everyone else.
3. Quality higher education in the 21st Century will require a sufficient investment in excellent faculty who have the academic freedom, terms of employment, and institutional support needed to do state-of-the-art professional work.
Faculty and professionals must have the academic freedom to exercise their professional judgment in educational decisions about what and how to teach in the best interests of a quality education and student success. They must be free and secure enough in their terms of employment to stretch and challenge students, and to apply high academic standards.
Colleges and universities must also provide faculty and staff with the resources and continuing professional development to stay current in their fields and to use the best methods for enhancing student learning and success.
The growing practice of hiring faculty into full and part-time contingent positions that are not eligible for due process protections of tenure inhibits the full application of academic standards and the free exercise of professional judgment.
4. Quality higher education in the 21st century should incorporate technology in ways that expand opportunity and maintain quality.
Technology that enhances learning is a welcome addition to the 21st century higher education experience. The current public conversation about the use of technology in higher education, however, suffers from a lack of depth and subtlety.
Too often the discussion begins with the unexamined assumption that “technology” and “the internet” are not already being incorporated into higher education in significant ways. Anyone who has spent any time in a college or university recently would dispute the assumption that underpins many demands for “innovation” in this area.
Even more significant, the technology debate would be improved if we made a more careful distinction between education and the transfer of information. Undoubtedly, the internet has already revolutionized the latter in universities and in the wider world. But education, which involves the development of higher level skills of assessment, critique, and expression, is a complex process that is often more challenging to produce in digital formats.
This latter point is related to another common assumption made when discussing online education—that it will save vast sums of money. When online technologies are used for higher levels of teaching rather than simply for rote learning or transfer of information, there is evidence that cost savings quickly evaporate. In fact, many faculty who are proponents of and experts in online education argue that teaching a good online course is more labor-intensive and thus more costly than more traditional formats.
In short, the role of online formats and other technological innovations in higher education is vastly more complex than the current public discussion would suggest. Issues of access (will some students be shortchanged simply because they don’t own a good computer or have access to high-speed internet), student success (will online formats work for under-prepared students who also deserve a chance for success?), equity, and quality need a deeper analysis if we are to have the kind of higher education we will need in the 21st century.
5. Quality education in the 21st Century will require the pursuit of real efficiencies and the avoidance of false economies.
Not every cut in costs in a business—or in a college-- is a real efficiency.
Many of the cuts colleges and universities have made during this current economic crisis—cutting classes, increasing class sizes, closing departments, slashing curricula, and reducing support services for students have helped campuses balance their budgets in the short-term, but the long-term costs of these cuts have not been adequately acknowledged or discussed.
In fact, the economic pressure to cut budgets and the political pressure to define all cuts as “efficiencies” currently makes it almost impossible to open a conversation about the hidden costs of various cuts.
We propose that the public discussion of increasing efficiency and productivity in higher education start here: a real efficiency that should be pursued will not only cut costs but also enhance or at least not harm student success and the principles of a quality higher education for the 21st century outlined in this document.
6. Quality higher education in the 21st Century will require substantially more public investment over current levels.
Money will not solve all of higher education’s problems, but adequate public investment in an enterprise so crucial to the country’s future well-being simply must be provided.
Assurances that “we can do more with less” may play well politically, but they will not move us toward affordable, quality higher education in the 21st century.
In fact, failure of leaders in higher education and in government to highlight the currently perilous level of public investment in higher education does the country a grave disservice, for it allows the public to believe we can achieve world leadership in higher education or even maintain our current levels of achievement by simply accepting the status quo.
7. Quality higher education in the 21st century cannot be measured by a standardized, simplistic set of metrics.
Simplistic measures of success in K-12 that are the legacy of No Child Left Behind have not served our country or our children well. We should not make the same mistakes in higher education.
Unfortunately, graduation rates, in isolation, appear to be gaining ascendancy as the national measure of higher education success. While we agree with the goal of significantly increasing the number of people with college degrees and certificates, this trend is disturbing because a national drive toward that goal—to the exclusion of others--can threaten important principles, including inclusiveness and access, that are crucial for the kind of higher education we will need in the 21st century.
A more fruitful direction would recognize that educational success, like human health, is a complex systemic process that requires a rich data picture (of both qualitative and quantitative measures) for full assessment. For higher education to flourish, all our leaders—in government and in education—must avoid the lure of reductionist measures and simplistic goals that will foster a false sense of progress now but bitter disappointment at the results in the future.
Conclusion: Change in American higher education in the 21st Century is both inevitable and desirable.
Change is, in fact, a commonplace in every college and university worthy of the name.
Historically, our colleges and universities have offered an ever-changing array of programs, courses, and teaching formats. Instead of seeing that rich diversity as a “luxury” we can no longer afford or as a “problem” to be fixed, we should see it as a strength that should be preserved and fostered. It is the environment in which higher education teaching and research flourish best and in which students are best able to reach their educational aspirations.
As we examine proposals for change in higher education in the coming decades, we should build on the traditions, principles, and vision that have characterized American higher education at its best. We believe that using the principles discussed here to inform the national conversation can lead us toward an American higher education system in the 21st century that will serve our nation well and be a source of pride.
The Ohio Conference AAUP represents nearly 4,500 college and university professors at both public and private institutions of higher education across the State of Ohio. The mission of the OCAAUP is to preserve and advance academic freedom, shared governance, the general welfare of college and university professors, and to promote the greater social good that comes from a dynamic, active professoriat.
OCAAUP Contact Information
Ohio Conference AAUP
137 East State Street
Columbus, OH 43215
Office Phone: (614) 545-6349, ext. 6349