May 14, 2008 1:49

Rx for pregnant moms: chocolate

I don't usually read the Journal of Epidemiology. But I will when it publishes findings entitled

Chocolate Consumption in Pregnancy and Reduced Likelihood of Preeclampsia

From the abstract:

Background: Preeclampsia is a major pregnancy complication with cardiovascular manifestations. Recent studies suggest that chocolate consumption may benefit cardiovascular health.

The methods I won't reprint, as they're a load of mumbo-jumbo to science dummies like me. But the findings are oh, so pure:

Conclusions: Our results suggest that chocolate consumption during pregnancy may lower risk of preeclampsia.

Now hand over that Kit-Kat. It's for my health.

Sphere Related Blogs & Articles

|

May 14, 2008 11:20

One in three military women sexually abused

I'm digging TheWip.net, the website of Women's International Perspective, a compilation of thoughtful, surprising blogs from women around the world. There's a "byline portal" that collects articles in newspapers and magazines on global news (check out this fascinating International Herald Tribune story on the courtship of young Saudi women).

But what caught my eye today is this blog entry by Nancy Van Ness on the sorry way our military treats servicewomen. Denied equal treatment and training as men, nonetheless

the greatest danger that military women in Iraq and Afghanistan face is from their male peers and officers. More women there are the victims of sexual assault than of injuries from hazardous military duties. Reuters reported as far back as 1995, “Ninety percent of women under 50 who have served in the US military and who responded to a survey report being victims of sexual harassment, and nearly one-third of the respondents of all ages say they have been raped.”

Imagine volunteering for a dangerous, exhausting, difficult job no one else wants—and being rewarded with atrocious treatment just for being a gal. Read Van Ness's whole post; it's horrifying, but worth your time.

Sphere Related Blogs & Articles

|

May 14, 2008 10:12

Professor fails students, loses job

From InsideHigherEd.com:

Who is to blame when students fail? If many students fail — a majority even — does that demonstrate faculty incompetence, or could it point to a problem with standards?

Here's what allegedly happened: Steven D. Aird lost his job teaching biology at Norfolk State University because he failed too many students. To make things murkier:

A subtext of the discussion is that Norfolk State is a historically black university with a mission that includes educating many students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The university suggests that Aird — who is white — has failed to embrace the mission of educating those who aren’t well prepared. But Aird — who had backing from his department and has some very loyal students as well — maintains that the university is hurting the very students it says it wants to help. Aird believes most of his students could succeed, but have no incentive to work as hard as they need to when the administration makes clear they can pass regardless.

Yikes. According to The Virginian-Pilot, 22 of the 24 students in his biochemistry course got Ds, Fs or dropped the class during his first semester of teaching in 2002. School officials told him his pass-fail rate was "unacceptable." But here's what else seems unacceptable: according to U.S. Education Department data, only 12% of Norfolk State students graduate in four years, and only 30% graduate in six years. As for the school, spokeswoman Sharon Hoggard tells InsideHigherEd, “Something is wrong when you cannot impart your knowledge onto students. We are a university of opportunity, so we take students who are underprepared, but we have a history of whipping them into shape. That’s our niche.”

Should a teacher lose a job because he refuses to pass underperforming students? Or is his abominable pass-fail rate a result of his lousy teaching? Hard to say. But I suspect the problem is bigger than this one guy and his biochem class.

Sphere Related Blogs & Articles

|