Sunday, August 22, 2010
Arkansas Lottery Tinkering with the lottery
Posted by Max Brantley on Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 6:57 AM
Some Arkansas legislators, having heard the howls of unhappy parents, are set on tinkering with new Arkansas lottery scholarship rules, particularly to make more "non-traditional" students eligible. It turns out, in the mad rush, the state did a reasonable job of getting money into the hands of 26,000 or so students (the explanation and notification process needs work), but 3,900 or so current college students with sufficient GPAs were left out on account of variety of factors, chiefly that they hadn't made 12 hours of progress each semester toward a college degree. They are, thus, not "current achievers," but "non-traditional students."
Hard fact: The students plugging along in fits and starts toward a degree were never as big a focus of the program as new high school graduates. The ideas was to get more of them to go to college. And to get more of them to work hard enough to achieve acceptable grades and on course to speedy graduation. Some consideration had to be given to existing students, out of fairness, and every single current two-year-college student with adequate grades got money. A huge number of four-year students did as well. Inevitably, some were left out, however, as everyone knew would happen.
After a few years, we'll shake out coverage for a good percentage of those who had the misfortune of birth dates too old for full lottery scholarship consideration. The pot available for non-traditional students will be more likely to cover more of the needs in the years ahead as students arrive with scholarships and some lose them for failure to meet standards.
What we don't need to do is talk about raising the GPAs for qualification, as at least one legislator has proposed. This was not supposed to be a merit scholarship program. It was supposed to lift all boats — at least all those with the demonstrated ability through ACT score or GPA to do college work. There are already sufficient concerns that the recipients are heavily weighted toward the better situated economically (a bias that inevitably has racial implications). Legislators need not take steps to insure that this is yet another government program more favorable to those who need it less. It is no surprise, naturally, that a Republican has come up with this idea.
Speaking of Lottery Scholarships
-
Nate Bell would require scholarship repayments if degrees not earned
April 25, 2012Good catch by Michael Cook, following Facebook posts by Rep. Nate Bell, a Tea Party Republican from Mena. /more/
- More »
Comments (44)
Showing 1-44 of 44
Hear, hear! The print reporters like Brantley, Simmons and (with today's piece) Lyon are putting the scholarship distribution into proper perspective. Alas, Ernie Dumas says on "Arkansas Week" that the current achievers who were awarded the lottery scholarships didn't really need them. I almost spit out my toothpaste.
like
dislike
Totally disagree on both points. Not all nontraditional students are "plugging along in fits and starts toward a degree." Many took a break from school for a legitimate reason, such as family or work or money. These students, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, are not only more likely to finish their degree -- because they're not coming to school to party and they've seen what it's like in the workforce without one -- but are also more likely to stay in Arkansas once they finish, due to existing ties. It seems to me that giving them a bigger slice of the pie is a better investment.
I think it will be interesting to see how much of this scholarship money is being flushed down the toilet on kids who either were unprepared academically or were too immature to buckle down and do the work. High school isn't hard, and I tend to think anything lower than a 3.0 means that person shouldn't be going on to a system where the work is more challenging and the student is without external motivators, for the most part.
Your use of the terms "merit scholarship" and "demonstrated ability" is confusing, and I think you're making a distinction without a difference. If you're awarding scholarships to kids with demonstrated ability, you're awarding them based on merit, and the only question is WHERE to draw the line, not WHETHER.
If the legislature tinkers with anything, however, they need to start by getting rid of the Vice President positions and sending those people back to South Carolina.
I don't agree with Brennan that we need to increase the GPA, but I do agree that non-traditional students are a better investment for the state. As a college professor myself, I've seen it time and again--non-traditional students are in college to get in and get out, and are actively trying to improve their situation. They tend to be successful, and anything we can do to help them is money well spent.
The ACT College Readiness benchmarks are:
18 English
22 Math
21 Reading
24 Science
These scores would lead to a composite score of 21 (but note that getting a 21 composite score does not guarantee that a student meets all four benchmarks). These benchmarks are the scores that indicate a 75% chance of getting a 'C' or higher in college courses in these subjects. This is based on actual data (actual test scores and the actual grades the students received in college). In Arkansas, only 18% of high school students met all four benchmarks (in Massachusetts, 41% meet all four). See http://act.org/news/data/10/benchmarks.htm…
At UALR, an ACT Math score of less than 21, or an ACT English score of 18 or less, requires a student to take developmental (remedial) courses that do not carry college credit. In addition, a composite score of 21 is required for regular admission. However, the lottery scholarships require only a composite score of 19.
So, if you define readiness as not needing to take remedial courses in college, lots of lottery scholarships are being given to students that are not ready to do college work.
The lottery scholarships should be given to students who meet or exceed the ACT benchmarks. Alternatively, at least a composite score of 21 should be required, so that students meet regular admission standards. That would make more money available for non-traditional students who have already proven themselves to be able to be successful in college.
And, for the record, I am not a Republican. I vote for Democrats or Greens.
I disagree. We need to raise the GPA and ACT standards.
We also need to put in more support mechanisms for low income, first generation college students. I would like to see the state promote two year colleges and give more support to these colleges in order to help low income, first generation college students since community colleges is where a lot of them tend to start out.
I understand we want lots of students to go to college but we also need to make sure that they FINISH.
I'd love to see a requirement where if you don't finish in 6 years, you have to pay back all that money. It seems like a waste of money if all these kids are not going to finish and trust me, a lot of them won't.
We have done a great job when it comes to access to higher education in America. We have some ways to go, I will say that. At the same time, the completion rate needs some improvement as well.
If you're talking about demonstrated ability to do college work, a 19 on the ACT does not show that. A 19 on the ACT will set you up with a bunch of remedial classes and studies have shown, the more remedial classes a student has to take, the more likely he or she WILL NOT graduate from college.
As I've said before, we need to raise the ACT standard to AT LEAST a 21 on the ACT and a 3.0 GPA.
The whole lottery fiasco shows us how big a desire there is to obtain a degree and I'd love to see more support from the state instead of students having to rely on the lottery scholarship. Of course at the majority of 4 year schools, five thousand dollars is a drop in the bucket.
Thank you for posting that Hume N. Bean.
I made a 25 on the ACT but math was my lowest score. I made a 19 and had to take a remedial math course.
As a followup to my previous message, I ask the following question:
Should lottery scholarships be paying for remedial courses in college, i.e., courses that do not carry college credit?
Many of the entering freshmen that received lottery scholarships will be given provisional admission and will be required to take remedial courses that do not count towards a college degree, while many non-traditional students with proven success in college will not be getting a lottery scholarship.
I don't think that's right.
At most colleges, remedial classes are paid for with a scholarship.
When I attended Pulaski Tech, my scholarship paid for my remedial math course.
I think it's fair for the scholarships to pay for remedial classes because the students are working towards a degree.
Of course the easiest way to get the scholarship to NOT pay for remedial classes is to require students to make at least a 21+ on the ACT.
I have been a college counselor for nine years and have worked at the four year and two year college level. I was really disappointed with the formula for how this money would be distributed between traditional and non-traditional students. Through my professional experiences, in the trenches with students, Brennan hit the nail on the head. Traditional students are graduating from high school with honors, yet they can't score above a 19 on the ACT. On the contrary, we have students who make a 2.5 GPA and score in the low teens on the ACT. Standards for traditional students should be raised and more money should provided for students who are non-traditional and are currently showing progress toward degree completion.
I'm concerned that, to some extent, the easy availability of "scholarship" money - without it being tied to performance/merit - will enable many students to effectively waste that money by being half-assed students because it's easier and more fun than getting a job. I have many friends who were pretty effective at milking the free-money train for several years while in school, even though they weren't exactly blazing new trails in academic achievement. I can't imagine that students have suddenly become wiser in the years since then...
Max does the receiving of the $5,000 lottery scholarships reduce or eliminate some eligibility for federal Pell Grants and other financial aid? If so, would it be possible to allow for this?
thanks
If you limit the availability of scholarships to only those with a 21 on the ACT, there's no need for a scholarship lottery. Like it or not, Arkansas produces a huge number of students with low ACT scores. Are they ready for college work? No. So you have to remediate them, and if you don't pay for remediation, they ain't going.
Y'all are still under the impression that A) there's a shortage of scholarship money, and B) there's some problem with students getting "something for nothing." Look at Max's numbers, in this and other posts. Huge numbers of college students are getting help where there may have been none before. And you should look at this from a selfish viewpoint. Every one of those students who gets a degree is one more educated Arkie that helps lift the state up out of the cycle of poverty and ignorance. Educate some kid, and that kid is much less likely to end up in prison or on welfare. Giving these kids "something for nothing" is actually a bargain for every one of us.
Besides which, we're not paying for this. The students' parents and grandparents are paying for it by buying lottery tickets. And as y'all all seemed to think when you were campaigning for the lottery, that doesn't cost us anything, right?
SocialistArkie, that's a great idea, shackle people who're already facing a lifetime of drudge work with a $10,000 debt they'll never be able to repay. You're all heart. You act like that's tax money forcibly exacted from you, IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY!!! It's the lottery losers who voluntarily 'donate' it. And raising the entrance requirements is your dog whistle way of keeping 'those people' from the award.
The people who're advocating an increase in the non-traditional pool are on the right track. Those folks have demonstrated desire through years of plugging away for a few hours at a whack. And any person with any kind of experience in higher ed will affirm that desire is much more important than smarts. $4 million was a ridiculously low figure to start with, the current achievers are more likely to be the party boys than the non-traditionals. So, cut the CA pool in half and give it to the NTs.
And finally (barring rebuttal) even if the student doesn't earn an award the college hours she has earned will make her a more valuable citizen. It's still true that the single greatest indicator of college success is parent's college success. If the parent gets halfway through, their children will be more likely to make it all the way through.
There is no wasted money when it is used to help people who might not go to college go to college.
Even if they wash out.
And really, who cares if freshmen need remedial classes?
There really are a lot of us out here that just do not get math.
Never have, never will.
Thank god for calculators.
That does not mean that non-math folks should not get a college degree.
I don't even understand why one would have to take math in college unless one is going into a career that requires math on a daily basis.
(I know, well-rounded student...blahblahblah)
and ditto on the hope that more scholarships are made available for the non-traditional students.
A question: A high school graduate goes into the military then enters college. Is he or she a non-traditional student?
"Is he or she a non-traditional student?"
Non-traditional. Traditional is strictly defined as high school straight to college, anything else is non-traditional (or locally defined, like current achiever).
I'm not against students getting money to take remedial courses.
But apparently there isn't enough money to give lottery scholarships to many really good nontraditional students that either never needed remediation or who have already taken their remedial courses. That seems wrong to me.
By raising the ACT composite score requirement to 21, it would provide an incentive to both K-12 students and K-12 schools to improve their performance.
Also, it just seems silly to give scholarships to students that don't meet admission requirements when other better students are not getting scholarships.
"There really are a lot of us out here that just do not get math."
That is a common statement made without any hesitation. It is more acceptable than saying, "I just don't get this reading thing."
Quick: 2 - 5 = ?? You would be surprised at how many college students are stumped by that one without a calculator, which shows that they have no idea of what numbers represent, just how to push buttons.
One of my children came home from elementary school with math homework. The first question was, "What is 15 minus 7?" He said, "Wait, I have to get my calculator." I told him that he knew the answer without a calculator and he said, "Yeah, it's 8, but the teacher wants us to use our calculators."
Getting back to remedial classes and student's carrying a full load, there are quite a few students who will use every trick to get financial aid, with graduation being a secondary concern, at best. Because colleges' funding depends partly on retention of students, it is tolerated.
And yes, I see that I used a possessive form instead of plural, but I just don't get writing.
Is there a grade point in college that must be met to keep the lottery scholarship? If so, then the self-cleansing mechanism is there as it has been for many years. Our state colleges have admmitted them and the freshman classes flush out those who don't want to do college level work. That's why sophomore class sizes are usually smaller than freshman classes. Sometimes it takes a jolt of seeing what studying is actually required to wake someone up as to whether they really want to be there. For some, it may be the first time where they must do and achieve and the family or social ties in the community don't have an effect (hopefully).
Here is another college math example. A student was having problems with basic probability. I took out a deck of cards and chose 3 black cards and 1 red card. After putting the four cards face up so that the student could study them, I shuffled them and asked, "If you pick a card, what is the chance that it will be the red one?" Answer, "50%, because there are only 2 colors."
College material? Scholarship recipient?
InsiderforOutsiders:
Regardless of what forms of financial aid a student receives, the federal government says no students receiving aid can exceed their budget. This budget is determined by a formula based on cost of attendance, number of dependents in household and family expected contribution. BUT, this only pertains to federal financial aid, not state or institutional aid. So it is possible for a student to receive a full Pell check, full amount of student loan award AND the full lottery scholarship. That could really add up for poor students.
Just for the sake of getting in on the conversation: "Getting math" is partly being able to manipulate numbers (add, subtract, multiply, divide). But the other part is "understanding the problem," or understanding how to work the problem.
Because of calculators and computers, many students today are not taught the multiplication tables. Knowing those tables is a matter of rote memory--memorizing the relationships among abstract mathematical symbols.
There is no such thing as "a two," although the numeral 2 is a generalized concept which can be applied to an infinite--or indistinct--number of entities: apples, oranges, cars, houses, people, etc., etc., etc.
But you need to understand more than 2+2=4, or 2x2=4 to solve a "time and distance" problem: e.g. "How many miles will a car traveling at 43 miles per hour cover in a 6-hour period?"
I use a calculator to do the arithmetic on "the time value of money" problems, such as "What will be the return on an investment of $6,000 at 3.5% interest in 23 years?", or to calculate installment payments on a house or car. You have to understand that there are four variables: principal, duration, interest rate, and installment. Given any three, you can calculate the fourth--provided you can manipulate numbers and you know how to apply which to what.
I could do it, eventually, using only pencil and paper. But it is quicker to use a calculator. Even so, I can do it only if I understand the concept of the problem and the proper manipulation of the variables.
For anything much beyond keeping the family budget and balancing the checkbook, or figuring out your federal income taxes, understanding the concepts and knowing what to do with which numbers is more important than being able to "crunch the numbers," for which calculators and computers are excellent instruments.
I used to teach insurance agents how to use a calculator to calculate the things they needed to figure out. They knew how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide, but they didn't understand the relationships among the variables with which they were working and how to use their calculators to manipulate them. Once they understood the concepts and the correct steps in the processes, they could "do the math" very well, and very easily.
Incidentally, and at the risk of sending this thread out into left field, many people aren't aware that a computer doesn't "write words," it deals solely in 1s and 0s, or +s and -s, depending upon how you express the internal electronic workings.
IMHO.
Thanks for letting me put in my two-cents worth.
"Because of calculators and computers, many students today are not taught the multiplication tables. Knowing those tables is a matter of rote memory--memorizing the relationships among abstract mathematical symbols."
OMG!!! Rote memory? What a dinosaur. ; )
Well, you got it about right, Doc. I remember the last ice age, and would have gone with it had it not been for mammoth-hide robes!
If the commission, lege and guv could see past next week they would move pre-med, nursing and medical tech students to the head of the list. There's a huge shortage of those graduates in Arkansas and nationwide. As the post WWII baby boom generation begins Medicare enrollment the shortage of healthcare providers is going to become acute, very acute.
Presently my sweetie can work off hours on a holiday and that one shift pays her just over $700. That's one nursing shift for one RN. Neither of us are complaining but sooner, rather than later, state officials must take action to relieve the shortage. Few of her working days does she put in under 14 hours rather than the assigned 12 hours.
A simple amendment to lottery rules could help repair this situation.
Me too, SkyPilot!
11x12=132, but when I was in grade school they only required us to memorize through times tens. I did the 11's and 12's because my sister and cousins had memorized through 12's years earlier. I also know what a logarithm and natural logarithm is and how to use a slipstick and a circular slide rule.
However, sadly, I also taught a class of sophomores at Oklahoma State University, who couldn't figure out what their grade was, if they answered 89 of the 100 questions on the test correctly (Given 90-100% =A; 80-90% =B;70-80%=C; 60-70%=D; 59% and below = F). I am not kidding.
Government Cheese put his or her finger on it:
"Traditional students are graduating from high school with honors, yet they can't score above a 19 on the ACT. "
If you raise the ACT required for a scholarship to 21, then you force the educational institution and the state government to explain how a student can graduate high school with honors but not be eligible for a lottery scholarship.
Because, seriously, if you can't study hard enough to make a 21 on the ACT, you either aren't trying or you're not being required to try.
Hume N. Bien nailed it: " ... apparently there isn't enough money ... "
Can anyone deny that fact? There was not enough scholarship money for all the traditional and non-traditional and any other classification of students who applied. Has the Arkansas legislature or Arkansas Department of Education asked the base question: How do we get the biggest impact from the limited amount of scholarship money?
If so, I've not seen it. Anyone else?
I agree with the comments that non-traditional students who return to college are more motivated and less likely to waste their time and money. I've been both a traditional (excuse me, "current achiever") and non-traditional student after serving in the military. There is no comparison. After getting out of the military, I was eligible for GI Bill funding (maybe $175/month during the school term?) and also worked part time to pay the bills. Coming out of high school I was 'expected to' go to college, but I wasn't ready at that age.
They need to lower the amount of scholarships for everyone and spread things out among everyone. The money goes to the college and not the student, so people aren't ripping off the system.
There's plenty of help for traditional students.. .. It's the young parents and middle age people taking a course or 2 a semester that need the most help.
Dott, I had the same experience as you in grade school--learning the tables only through the tens. A few years ago I was playing around with numbers and discovered that the elevens table is a "natural" so more or less memorized it, then went on to the twelves. It got a little more difficult at the higher levels, but I memorized it too. But I haven't used it much and those two tables haven't stuck in my memory the way the original tables did way back in the previous millennium.
I don't know about logarithms as I had no math beyond tenth grade plane geometry. Never did work with a slipstick, but did learn how to work a circular computer for calculations related to flying--elapsed time and distance, fuel consumption, air speed/ground speed, etc. Again, I had to understand the problem first and which way to manipulate the numbers in order to get the correct answer, but that circular computer was a very handy and effectivel tool back during my days of active flying.
ok72076:
That statement, "the money goes to the college and not the student, so people aren't ripping off the system," is incorrect. The money goes to the student. Sure, the money is sent to the college to cover tuition and fees, but any remaining money is reimbursed to the student. Therefore, a student who is already receiving a Pell grant or other scholarship is essentially getting more free money. If the student's Pell grant covers their tuition and fees, then the lottery scholarship is money in that student's pocket.
I hear you Art. I know some people who are going to college simply because they received the lottery scholarship and plan to just scrape by. We need people who WANT to do well in college and are hungry for a college education.
I feel that sadly a lot of this money will be wasted on students who will go up to a college and just party their butts off.
Couldn't be Better, in order to keep the scholarship, I believe you have to have a 2.5 GPA. You also have to take 15 credit hours per semester.
Dott, in my intro psyc class, our grades were given to us as z-scores. That thinned the herd fairly quickly.
Aw, c'mon folk; let's get real.
There is no good thing that cannot be abused.
And what is better than free money?
And what is more likely to be abused than free money?
Look at the track record in the United States!
Essentially every child in the United States is guaranteed a free tax-payer-paid education, all the way through a high-school diploma.
Look how many of those students fritter away their opportunity--how many drop out before completing the course, and how many do just enough barely to scrape by, getting a diploma that does not represent the ability to perform at the post-secondary level.
There will be multitudes of lottery-scholarship recipients who go to college basically to get away from their parents, check out the campus scene, "shop for love," or for any number of other non-academic reasons. Why should we be surprised?
And anyway, it's not tax money extracted from hard-working people; it's gambling money, thrown away in the search for instant riches. It came from greed; why would anyone be surprised that it is consumed by the greedy?!
Let's applaud the ones who take the opportunity seriously, who take the money ethically, and who pursue their educations responsibly. Let's applaud those who do their best to "do it right." Let's cheer on those who have the vision of education's improving their lives, who pursue that vision, and who make a difference in their own lives and a difference in the world we'll be turning over to them.
Viva la scholars!!!
Archaeopteryx nailed it. Simply being in a college classroom raises expectations and opportunities. Not all will fulfill their dreams or even our hopes but there is a difference between high school and college that can change a culture. This is a culture that wants badly for change in Arkansas.
We see on this blog a sad reminder that too many folks do not have a clue. Anyone who has matriculated from high school to college to a graduate or professional school knows the exponential leaps in the performance demand w each step. This is a tremendous opportunity to raise the cultural standards by which we judge an educated person in Arkansas. Attaining a degree is a fine watermark but dog paddling right up to the boat is an accomplishment that may well help us as a society as much or more.
Too bad that the dog-paddle is so expensive, and that someone in the boat keeps saying, "C'mon, Fido, you can do it, you can do it", while drifting further from shore.
I wonder how many HS students are even aware of how rigorous college can be? I know that I had NO idea. 5-hour Calculus was a like a cold bucket of water over my head.
Unfortunately, I think our obsession with the Razorbacks helps communicate an idea that college is all about fun. And if you look at all the taxpayer-funded TV advertising by the various universities in this state, it's all about the student being comfortable. We need advertising that says college is a life-changing experience and it's going to be difficult, but worth it. Not how friendly the student body is and how well you'll know your instructors.
to Government Cheese: yes, the full pell grant -- not awarded to every eligible student due to funding BTW, full subsidized and unsub. fed loans, work-study, and 5k lottery scholarship add up --- and cover the basic costs of attending UCA with tuition, room, board, books, NCAA "upgrade" fees of almost $500 per FT UCA student, lab fees, supplies. UCA's estimated cost to attend in $18k+ per year. This is the actual experience for one student so no one needs to talk about reducing the lottery scholarship if a student qualifies for fed aid. The way tuition is being increased because of the lottery 5k award, families need every dollar available or our children just will not be able to go to college when they have worked hard in high school and earned the opportunity to be there. Instead of looking at cutting what the students are eligible for, how about looking at the bloated lottery staff salaries yes your 324k ernie! and those ad campaign millions that are wasted!
Roland, you know why the colleges (and lottery) buy TV ads? the ad agencies make 15% commission off media placement on top of the agency's production and professional fees. look at the real bottom line of these state ad agency contracts and you will find very healthy profit margins that small business owners would envy.
Hey, Bayou, you need to look at this week's Times. Not all universities in the state cost 18k a year to attend. Granted, you don't get division I football...
My husband carried 12 hours last semester, 2 hours were for a non-credit class needed to get to the credit class. He made the dean's list, never missed a class, handed his work in before it was due. He is entering a new field after his second layoff in 8-years in a field he has worked in for 25-years. His field is no longer stable & he was "out sourced" over seas with both layoffs. His application was handed in before the deadline, complete with nothing needed. He is carring 14 hours, all credit classes, this semester. We did not get the scholarship - zip, nada, not a dime.
We are down to one income & risk loosing everything with each paycheck... but we don't get any part of the lottery money.... Please tell me again how excited we are to be about buying a lottery ticket??
My husband carried 12 hours last semester, 2 hours were for a non-credit class needed to get to the credit class. He made the dean's list, never missed a class, handed his work in before it was due. He is entering a new field after his second layoff in 8-years in a field he has worked in for 25-years. His field is no longer stable & he was "out sourced" over seas with both layoffs. His application was handed in before the deadline, complete with nothing else needed. He is now carrying 14 hours, all credit classes, this semester. We did not get the scholarship - zip, nada, not a dime.
We are down to one income & risk loosing everything with each paycheck... but we don't get any part of the lottery money.... Please tell me again how excited we are to be about buying a lottery ticket??
More by Author
-
Arkansas unemployment rate drops in January
The state says the unemployment rate in January dropped to 7.6 percent from 7.8 percent the month before on rising total employment.
- Mar 13, 2012
-
Walmart updates response to bribery allegations
Walmart has issued an updated response to allegations that the company covered up evidence of bribery in the course of building the retail chain's footprint in Mexico several years ago.
- Apr 24, 2012
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: New attention to Tom Cotton, no press champion
All I can say is "Don't pick this Cotton!"
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Hurst fined again by bar committee for late filing
As a Democrat, and a lawyer, I have to ask, do we really want someone…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Surgeon general strikes deal on disturbance charges
Jegley is right. Even if the cops are wrong, you have to submit, and then…
- on May 24, 2012
Top Commenters
Blogroll
Slideshows
-
Police close the Occupy Little Rock camp, perhaps the last Occupy encampment on public land.
Site Index
News
Cover Story / Arkansas Reporter / The Week That Was / Smart Talk / The Insider / The Observer / Editorial / Max Brantley / Ernest Dumas / Gene Lyons / Bob Lancaster / Words / Guest Writer / Letters
Entertainment
A&E Feature / To-Do List / In Brief / Movie Reviews / Music Reviews / Theater Reviews / A&E News / Art Notes / Graham Gordy / Books / Media / Dining Reviews / Dining Guide / What's Cookin' / Calendar / The Televisionist / Movie Listings / Gallery Listings
This Week's Cover
Quick Links
Special Publications
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
