Forages for Horses Revamped

The Forages for Horses program began in Ohio in1998 as a collaboration between the Ohio Forages & Grasslands Council and Ohio State University Extension. Over time, additional collaborations with the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Ohio Department of Agriculture and local Soil and Water Conservation Districts expanded the program. At its inception, one to three educators would partner to provide eight hours of in-person lectures followed by a pasture walk to better the management practices of equine enthusiasts. From 2021 through 2022, the curriculum was adapted for a hybrid classroom and included three 90-minute live webinars featuring nine different presentations followed by online social events. The modifications to the curriculum were made to improve access to equine resources and grazing education across Ohio. The Forages for Horses resources were also updated as part of the process. Learning modules posted in Canvas (an online learning management system) provided additional information that expanded upon the original curriculum. In 2022, 41 students from Ohio and surrounding states registered for the online course and webinars. Participants were able to hear directly from educators - more than in past iterations of the program– to expand their depth of knowledge and increase opportunities for participation without the location of the class posing a barrier for attendance. This program will continue to be revised over the coming years to remain relevant and accessible to Ohioans

Syracuse University, School of Architecture

The work presented here is the product of a year-long process that is the culminating experience of a professional education in architecture. It is a process that stresses inquiry and product, research and design, writing and visualization. It has been along-established goal at Syracuse that the final efforts of both the undergraduate and graduate prgrams be indistinguishable from ont another; thus the mixture of undergraduate and graduate award winners. Each student is advised by a committee of three and the final reviews are graded by a committee of five. Following the final reviews a panel of outside experts is invited to Superjury to see the best of the work. At the end of the day the entire faculty assembles to award the prizes that are recognized here. The James A. Britton prizes for best thesis are awarded annually. The runner-up Dean\u27s Citations and Thesis Citations are awarded to all students participating in the Superjury. -Bruce Abbey Students:Yanel De Angel, M. Arch, Palio Ritual and Market Siena, ItalyGonzalo Diez, M. Arch, Rural school EcuadorRyan Dillon, B. Arch, Ansel Adams Gallery CaliforniaChristian Daniels, B. Arch, Virtual Dwelling Los Angeles, CaliforniaAmador Pons, B. Arch, Housing the Homeless New York, New YorkH. Philipp Walter, B. Arch, A Studio Gallery Addition to the Everson Museum of Art Syracuse, New YorkMaria Agostini, M. Arch, Carmelite Monastery Puerto RicoHeidi Christianson, B. Arch, Community Church, Well, and Market HaitiD. Jason Olsen, B. Arch, Digital Library and Community Archive New York, New YorkMaricel Ramos, M. Arch, Registration Center and Public Entry San Juan, Puerto RicoRyan Samsa, B. Arch, Urban Housing Rochester, New YorkJeffrey Zynda, INS Border Station Alexandria Bay, New Yor

Fragmentation and logical omniscience

It would be good to have a Bayesian decision theory that assesses our decisions and thinking according to everyday standards of rationality — standards that do not require logical omniscience (Garber 1983, Hacking 1967). To that end we develop a “fragmented” decision theory in which a single state of mind is represented by a family of credence functions, each associated with a distinct choice condition (Lewis 1982, Stalnaker 1984). The theory imposes a local coherence assumption guaranteeing that as an agent's attention shifts, successive batches of "obvious" logical information become available to her. A rule of expected utility maximization can then be applied to the decision of what to attend to next during a train of thought. On the resulting theory, rationality requires ordinary agents to be logically competent and to often engage in trains of thought that increase the unification of their states of mind. But rationality does not require ordinary agents to be logically omniscient