Mini Bach Festival: Program I The Musical Offering

This is the concert program of the Mini Bach Festival performance on Tuesday, June 20, 2000 at 8:00 p.m., at the Tsai Performance Center, 685 Commonwealth Avenue. Works performed were the following from The Musical Offering, BWV 1079 by Johann Sebastian Bach: Ricercar a 3, BWV 1079.1, Sonata sopr'il Soggetto Reale, BWV 1079.5, Ricercar a 6, BWV 1079.5, Canon a 2 cancrizans, BWV 1079.3a, Canon a 2 Violini in unisoni, BWV 1079.3b, Canon a 2 per Motum contrarium, BWV 1079.3d, Canon a 2 per Tonus, Fuga Canonica in Epidiapente, BWV 1079.4, Canon perpetuus super Thema Regium, BWV 1079.2, Canon a 2, BWV 1079.6, Canon a 4, BWV 1079.7, and Canon perpetuus, BWV 1079.9. Digitization for Boston University Concert Programs was supported by the Boston University Humanities Library Endowed Fund

Out-of-school suspensions and parental involvement in children’s education

Do parents alter their investment in their child’s human capital in response to changes in school inputs? If they do, then ignoring this effect will bias the estimates of school and parental inputs in educational production functions. This paper tries to answer this question by studying out-of-school suspensions and their effect on parental involvement in children’s education. The use of out-of- school suspensions is the novelty of this paper. Out-of-school suspensions are chosen by the teacher or the principal of the school and not by parents, but they are a consequence of student misbehavior. To account for the nature of these out-of-school suspensions, they are instrumented with measures of “principal’s preference toward discipline.” The estimates show that, without controlling for selection, the level of parental involvement is negatively correlated with the number of out-of-school suspensions. Once selection is accounted for, the effect disappears—that is, out-of-school suspensions do not affect parental involvement in children’s education.Education ; School choice

The Canon(s) of Constitutional Law: An Introduction

Any discipline has a canon, a set of themes that organize the way in which people think about the discipline. Or, perhaps, any discipline has a number of competing canons. Is there a canon of constitutional law? A group of casebook authors met in December 1999 to discuss the choices they had made - what they had decided to include, what to exclude, what they regretted excluding (or including), what principles they used in developing their casebooks. Most of the authors were affiliated with law schools, but some had developed coursebooks for use in undergraduate political science and constitutional history courses. Each participant was asked to write a short paper describing the canon of constitutional law, either as reflected in his or her choices, or in the range of materials available in the field. What do coursebook authors\u27 reflections on their choices show about the canon(s) of constitutional law? In my view, three themes pervaded our discussions, and many of the papers that follow. A crude classification is that one theme involves the focus of the constitutional law canon, another involves the canon\u27s substance, and the third involves the audience for constitutional law studies

The Canon Wars

Canons are taking their turn down the academic runway in ways that no one would have foretold just a decade ago. Affection for canons of construction has taken center stage in recent Supreme Court cases and in constitutional theory. Harvard Dean John Manning and originalists Will Baude and Stephen Sachs have all suggested that principles of “ordinary interpretation” including canons should inform constitutional interpretation. Given this newfound enthusiasm for canons, and their convergence in both constitutional and statutory law, it is not surprising that we now have two competing book-length treatments of the canons—one by Justice Scalia and Bryan Garner, Reading Law, and the other by Yale Law Professor William N. Eskridge, Interpreting Law. Both volumes purport to provide ways to use canons to read statutes and the Constitution. In this Review of Interpreting Law, we argue that this contemporary convergence on canons raises some significant interpretive questions about judicial power and the very idea of a canon

The mismatch between job openings and job seekers

Today's high unemployment rate is often linked to a structural imbalance—a mismatch between the skills and location required to fill vacant jobs and the skills and geographical preferences of the unemployed. But the evidence downplays the role of this mismatch.Unemployment ; Labor market

Percussion Ensemble

This is the concert program of the Boston University Percussion Ensemble performance on Tuesday, November 13, 2007 at 8:00 p.m., at the Concert Hall, 855 Commonwealth Avenue. Works performed were "Melody Competition" by Evan Ziporyn, "Canon alla Ottava from The Art of Fugue" by Johann Sebastian Bach, "Canon for Three Equal Voices: in Memoriam Igor Stravinsky" by Elliott Carter, "Canon Ball" by Donald Martino, and "Drumming," Part 1 by Steve Reich. Digitization for Boston University Concert Programs was supported by the Boston University Center for the Humanities Library Endowed Fund

Canonical Construction and Statutory Revisionism: The Strange Case of the Appropriations Canon

In this article, we consider the impact of positive political theory on legislative interpretation and, in particular, the debate over interpretive canons. Our vehicle for this consideration is the appropriations canon. By virtue of this canon, courts construe narrowly legislative changes to statutes made through the appropriations process. We consider the underlying logic and rationale of this canon -- essentially, that the appropriations process is unrepresentative and insufficiently deliberative -- and use this analysis to investigate, more broadly, the processes of canonical construction in the modern statutory interpretation jurisprudence. Canonical construction, we argue, must be attentive to the equilibrium effects of judicial approaches and, moreover, it must be based upon a normatively compelling theory of lawmaking and the legislative process. The appropriations canon fails both of these tests; and, in its structure, it reveals some of the weaknesses of the contemporary reliance on canons to illuminate statutory meaning