Stakeholder consultation on secondary plan development for the South Basin Lake Manitoba Planning area

Meeting: Celebrating Dialogue : An International SAS2 Forum, November 3, 2008, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, CASAS reports are made available in order to provide timely access to the information by interested researchers. This report has been subject to an internal review process to ensure accuracy and quality

The development of sentence-interpretation strategies in monolingual German-learning children with and without specific language impairment

Previous research on sentence comprehension conducted with German-learning children has concentrated on the role of case marking and word order in typically developing children. This paper compares, the performance of German-learning children with language impairment (age 4-6 years) and without language impairment (aged 2-6, 8-9 years) in two experiments that systematically vary the cues animacy, case marking; word-order, and subject-verb agreement. The two experiments differ with regard to the choice of case marking: in the first it is distinct but in the second it is neutralized. The theoretical framework is the competition model developed by Bates and Mac Whinney and their collaborators, a variant of the parallel distributed processing models. It is hypothesized that children of either population first appreciate the cue animacy that can be processed locally, that is, "on the spot," before they turn to more distributed cues leading ultimately up to subject-verb agreement, which presupposes the comparison of various constituents before an interpretation can be established. Thus agreement is more "costly" in processing than animacy or the (more) local cue initial NP. In experiment I with unambiguous case markers it is shown that the typically developing children proceed from animacy to the nominative (predominantly in coalition with the initial NP) to agreement, while in the second experiment with ambiguous case markers these children turn from animacy to the initial NP and then to agreement. The impaired children also progress from local to distributed cues. Yet, in contrast to the control group, they do not acknowledge the nominative in coalition with the initial NP in the first experiment but only in support of agreement. However, although they do not seem to appreciate distinct case markers to any large extent in the first experiment, they are irritated if such distinctions are lacking: in experiment II all impaired children turn to. animacy (some in coalition with the initial NP and/or particular word orders). In the discussion, the relationship between short-term memory and processing as well as the relationship between production and comprehension of case markers and agreement are addressed. Further research is needed to explore in more detail "cue costs" in sentence comprehension

Prospectus, February 4, 1981

12 RUNNING FOR POSITIONS IN STU GO.; Severns speaks to Community News Class; Sign up for student insurance; $1.50 a gallon? Ouch!: Instructiors discuss oil de-regulation; Everything you always wanted to know about participating in class!; Did you know that?; The Ice Capades \u27celebrates\u27 at the Hall Feb. 10-15; Muddy Waters: Is he the father of Rock n\u27 Roll?; Media 1000$ catches Parkland\u27s eyes!; Ramblin\u27...; Classifieds; Homer has big celebration for their hero: Paul Lewis; 11 Amendments to Stugo Constitution; 250 enrolled in Learning Lab.; It\u27s Susan B. Anthony\u27s b-day!; 42 donated at the Blood Drive; Images getting ready to hit the presses.; Women\u27s team boosts record to 19-1; Cobras beat arch-rival Lake Land; Dunson slam takes game into overtime: Cobras upset No. 1 Kankakee in double OT; Women beat Cavaliers; Softball practice begins Feb. 9; Geoff Ray wins FF competition; Fast Freddy Contest; Collins, the perfect leaderhttps://spark.parkland.edu/prospectus_1981/1028/thumbnail.jp

University of Nebraska Five-Year Strategy, Revised August 12, 2020

The University of Nebraska Five-Year Strategy: Trust, Predictability, and Positive Outcomes for Nebraskans In February 2020, the newly named president of the University of Nebraska system, Ted Carter, gathered a diverse 28-member team of students, faculty, staff, and administrators to help chart the path forward for Nebraska’s public university. The team’s goal: At a time of great change in higher education, lay out a vision for what the future should look like for the University of Nebraska. Broad themes quickly emerged, including student access and success, excellence in teaching and research, diversity and inclusion, partnerships, and fiscal effectiveness. Then COVID-19 hit, forcing a pause in the team’s work. The ensuing months showed that the initial priorities identified by the team were not only still relevant, but more important than ever in defining the future of higher education. From that early work has emerged a five-year strategy for growth and success across the four-campus University of Nebraska system. In addition to the strategic planning team, Carter engaged alumni and donors, elected leaders, leaders in business and agriculture, the Board of Regents, NU senior leadership, and others in conversations about the University’s future. The resulting strategy is built around several key principles: The value of higher education is clear and growing. Nebraska’s success is tied to that of its University. Students come first. The University of Nebraska should be the best place in the country to be a student, providing high-quality, affordable, accessible education that prioritizes students’ mental and physical health and prepares them for post-graduation success. Our people are our greatest asset. We will invest accordingly. We have a responsibility to make the best use of every dollar Nebraskans entrust to us. Themes of equity and inclusion touch everything we do. We will be a University for everyone—successful only when all voices are heard. Finally, Nebraskans should know what to expect from their University. We must work every day to maintain the trust and confidence of the people of our state

Nitrogen Inventory in the Nooksack-Fraser Transboundary Watershed

The Nooksack-Fraser transboundary area (2639 km2) is home to communities with a strong base in farming, fisheries and outdoor recreation. Water quality issues impact parts of this area, where sewage effluent and animal waste are potential sources of both fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) and nitrogen (N) in the environment. Excessive nitrogen loading can lead to eutrophication in coastal areas, and nitrate contamination of groundwater. The Nooksack-Fraser Transboundary Nitrogen (NFT-N) project was developed to determine the sources and fates of N in the watershed using data on energy use, transportation, fertilization, wastewater treatment plants, livestock operations, wildlife and more. This project brings together stakeholders, agencies, and scientists on both sides of the international border to achieve a first characterization of N inventories and fluxes across the watershed. A comprehensive N assessment can benefit N management by providing key information on source distribution. Focusing on agricultural activities first, we estimate using crop-specific fertilizer recommendations that the requirements for synthetic fertilizer N on the US side of the watershed ranges between 1855 and 3184 metric tons (MT). Application of livestock manure to crops is equal to, or perhaps more than, fertilizer requirements, ranging between 1926 and 3963 MT N per year. The combined septic and sewage input of N falls between 71 and 84 MT per year, while atmospheric deposition contributes 527 MT N per year. Preliminary results for the US side demonstrate the importance of N inputs from agriculture. Results will be refined by updating values, adding other components, integrating with the existing Canadian budget, and understanding connections between inputs and N fates in ground and surface water. The budget will be used to examine the impacts of N policy and management across the boundary (US-Canada), and to support future efforts in developing sustainable N use and management plans in the region

Crop Updates 2008 - Farming Systems

This session covers thirty nine papers from different authors: PLENARY 1. Developments in grain end use, Dr John de Majnik, New Grain Products, GRDC, Mr Paul Meibusch, New Farm Products and Services, GRDC, Mr Vince Logan, New Products Executive Manager, GRDC PRESENTATIONS 2. Global warming potential of wheat production in Western Australia: A life cycle assessment, Louise Barton1, Wahid Biswas2 and Daniel Carter3, 1School of Earth & Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 2Centre of Excellence in Cleaner Production, Division of Science and Engineering, Curtin University of Technology, 3Department of Agriculture and Food 3. How much fuel does your farm use for different farm operations? Nicolyn Short1, Jodie Bowling1, Glen Riethmuller1, James Fisher2 and Moin Salam1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Muresk Institute, Curtin University of Technology 4. Poor soil water storage and soil constraints are common in WA cropping soils, Stephen Davies, Jim Dixon, Dennis Van Gool and Alison Slade, Department of Agriculture and Food, Bob Gilkes, School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, University of Western Australia 5. Developing potential adaptations to climate change for low rainfall farming system using economic analysis tool. STEP, Megan Abrahams, Caroline Peek, Dennis Van Gool, Daniel Gardiner and Kari-Lee Falconer, Department of Agriculture and Food 6. What soil limitations affect the profitability of claying on non-wetting sandplain soils? David Hall1, Jeremy Lemon1, Harvey Jones1, Yvette Oliver2 and Tania Butler1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CSIRO Div Sustainable Ecology, Perth 7. Farming systems adapting to a variable climate; Two case studies, Kari-Lee Falconer, Department of Agriculture and Food 8. Importance of accounting for variation in crop yield potential when making fertiliser decisions, Michael Robertson and Yvette Oliver, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Floreat 9. Soil acidity is a widespread problem across the Avon River Basin, Stephen Carr1, Chris Gazey2, David York1 and Joel Andrew1, 1Precision SoilTech, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 10. The use of soil testing kits and ion-selective electrodes for the analysis of plant available nutrients in Western Australian soils, Michael Simeoni and Bob Gilkes School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, University of Western Australia 11. Redlegged earth mite resistance and integrated strategies for their control in Western Australia, Mangano G. Peter and Micic Svetlana, Department of Agriculture and Food 12. The economics of treating soil pH (liming), Chris Gazey, Steve Davies, Dave Gartner and Adam Clune, Department of Agriculture and Food, 13. Health benefits – A future differentiator for high value grains, Matthew Morell, Theme Leader, CSIRO Food Futures Flagship 14. Carbon in Sustralian cropping soils – We need to be realistic, Alan Umbers (M Rur Sc), GRDC/DAFF Sustainable Industries Initiative Project 15. AGWEST® Bartolo bladder clover (Trifolium spumosum) − a low cost annual pasture legume for the wheat/sheep zone, Angelo Loi, Brad Nutt and Clinton Revell, Department of Agriculture and Food 16. Maximising the value of point based soil sampling: Monitering trends in soil pH through time, Joel Andrew1, David York1, Stephen Carr1 and Chris Gazey2, 1Precision SoilTech, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 17. Improved crop root growth and productivity with deep ripping and deep placed lime, Stephen Davies1, Geoff Kew2*, Chris Gazey1, David Gartner1 and Adam Clune1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2School of Earth and Geographical Sciences University of Western Australia, *Presenting author 18. The role of pastures in hosting Root Lesion Nematode (RLN, Pratylenchus neglectus), Vivien Vanstone, Ali Bhatti and Ming Pei You, Department of Agriculture and Food 19. To rip or not to rip. When does it pay? Imma Farre, Bill Bowden and Stephen Davies, Department of Agriculture and Food 20. Can yield be predicted from remotely sensed data, Henry Smolinski, Jane Speijers and John Bruce, Department of Agriculture and Food 21. Rotations for profit, David McCarthy and Gary Lang, Facey Group, Wickepin, WA 22. Rewriting rules for the new cropping economics, David Rees, Consultant, Albany 23. Reducing business risk in Binnu! – A case study, Rob Grima, Department of Agriculture and Food 24. Does improved ewe management offer grain farmers much extra profit? John Young, Farming Systems Analysis Service, Ross Kingwell, Department of Agriculture and Food, and UWA, Chris Oldham, Department of Agriculture and Food RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS 25. Crop establishment and productivity with improved root zone drainage, Dr Derk Bakker, Research Officer, Department of Agriculture and Food 26. Will wheat production in Western Australia be more risky in the future? Imma Farre and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture and Food PAPERS 27. Building farmers’ adaptive capacity to manage seasonal variability and climate change, David Beard, Department of Agriculture and Food 28. Precision placement increases crop phosphorus uptake under variable rainfall: Simulation studies, Wen Chen1 2, Richard Bell1, Bill Bowden2, Ross Brennan2, Art Diggle2 and Reg Lunt2, 1School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 29. What is the role of grain legumes on red soil farms? Rob Grima, Department of Agriculture and Food 30. Fertiliser placement influences plant growth and seed yield of grain crops at different locations of WA, Qifu Ma1, Zed Rengel1, Bill Bowden2, Ross Brennan2, Reg Lunt2 and Tim Hilder2, 1Soil Science & Plant Nutrition, University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 31. A review of pest and disease occurrences for 2007, Peter Mangano and Dusty Severtson, Department of Agriculture and Food 32. Effect of stocking rates on grain yield and quality of wheat in Western Australia in 2007, Shahajahan Miyan, Sam Clune, Barb Sage and Tenielle Martin, Department of Agriculture and Food 33. Storing grain is not ‘set and forget’ management, Chris Newman, Department of Agriculture and Food 34. Improving understanding of soil plant available water capacity (PAWC): The WA soil water database (APSoil), Yvette Oliver, Neal Dalgliesh and Michael Robertson, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems 35. The impact of management decisions in drought on a low rainfall northern wheatbelt farm, Caroline Peek and Andrew Blake, Department of Agriculture and Food 37. Cullen – A native pasture legume shows promise for the low-medium rainfall cropping zone, Megan Ryan, Richard Bennett, Tim Colmer, Daniel Real, Jiayin Pang, Lori Kroiss, Dion Nicol and Tammy Edmonds-Tibbett, School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia and Future Farm Industries CRC 38. Climate risk management tools – useful, or just another gadget? Lisa Sherriff, Kari-Lee Falconer, Daniel Gardiner and Ron McTaggart Department of Agriculture and Food 39. Benefits of crop rotation for management of Root Lesion Nematode (RLN, Pratylenchus neglectus), Vivien Vanstone, Sean Kelly and Helen Hunter, Department of Agriculture and Foo

Developing an Integrated Ocean Observing System for New Zealand

New Zealand (NZ) is an island nation with stewardship of an ocean twenty times larger than its land area. While the challenges facing NZ’s ocean are similar to other maritime countries, no coherent national plan exists that meets the needs of scientists, stakeholders or kaitiakitanga (guardianship) of NZ’s ocean in a changing climate. The NZ marine science community used the OceanObs’19 white paper to establish a framework and implementation plan for a collaborative NZ ocean observing system (NZ-OOS). Co-production of ocean knowledge with Māori will be embedded in this national strategy for growing a sustainable, blue economy for NZ. The strengths of an observing system for a relatively small nation come from direct connections between the science impetus through to users and stakeholders of an NZ-OOS. The community will leverage off existing ocean observations to optimize effort and resources in a system that has historically made limited investment in ocean observing. The goal of the community paper will be achieved by bringing together oceanographers, data scientists and marine stakeholders to develop an NZ-OOS that provides best knowledge and tools to the sectors of society that use or are influenced by the ocean

OpenStax Calculus I Ancillary Materials

These OpenStax Calculus I ancillary materials, including guided notes and questions using Edfinity, were developed as a result of a Round 17 Affordable Materials Grant