Standard Learning Research Articles

Efficient Logging-While-Drilling Image Logs Interpretation Using Deep Learning

Logging-while-drilling (LWD) borehole images are very important data to support formation characterization and drilling operations. The manual interpretation of this data is a time-consuming task, limited by inconsistencies and uncertainties. We propose a deep-learning (DL)-based supervised method to automatically correlate geological features in low-resolution LWD image logs. Additionally, we tested two learning strategies, namely standard learning (SL) and curriculum learning (CL), to critically analyze the differences in the application on both synthetic and field data. Our results show that these DL models can effectively replace manual labor in dip picking but highlight the need for human intervention to validate and classify the correlated features, proving the utility of the semi-automatic paradigm.

Hots Questions and Narrative Writing Ability of Lower Primary Pupils in a Vernacular School

Narrative writing is a skill given emphasis by the Ministry of Education (MoE) through the specific Content Standards (CS) and Learning Standards (LS) stipulated in the Curriculum Standard and Assessment Document (DSKP) and aligned to the Common European Framework of References (CEFR) scales. However, lower primary pupils; particularly in urban areas still struggle to produce narrative writings that show quality. This paper presents and discusses an Exploratory Case Study on the use of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) questions to improve pupils’ narrative writing skills. The study involved 6 purposively chosen lower primary pupils in a vernacular school in Sarawak. Data were collected through classroom interactions, WhatsApp interviews and document analysis. This was to ensure the validity and reliability of the data. Findings of the students’ interview responses indicated that they felt the HOTS questions helped improve their narrative writing as evident in the analysis of their writing tests. Discussions on the findings imply pedagogical, theoretical and policy implications relevant to the Malaysian education and students aspirations outlined in the Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Meanwhile, areas for further research can focus on the effectiveness of HOTS on improving other language skills and competency.

Analysis of the assessment in Physical Education curricula in Primary Education

ABSTRACT One way to understand the Physical Education (PE) curriculum is through assessment. After the appearance in Spain of the learning standard (LS) as a reference for more specific assessment, the main objective of this work was to analyse the assessment aspects for PE in Primary Education in the curricula of Spain’s 17 Autonomous Communities. Documentary analysis of the official regulations was used as a data collection technique. Qualitative and quantitative variables were analysed for the 3,357 assessment references. Qualitative variables included: LS typology and sequencing, and the existence of assessment orientations. Quantitative variables included: the curricular size, the presence of the cognitive, motor, and socio-affective dimensions in the different standards, percentages of comprehensiveness (assessment references which include the three dimensions) and curricular effectiveness (capacity of each curriculum to optimise the standards to include the greatest number of dimensions). The LS was the assessment element generally used by the majority of curricula. The cognitive dimension (39.42%) predominated in the assessment references, at the expense of the motor (30.94%) and socio-affective dimensions (29.65%). Only 11.70% of the 3,357 assessment references used incorporated the three dimensions (cognitive, motor and socio-affective). An inversely proportional relation seemed to exist between curricular size (number of standards) and its comprehensiveness (r = −0.505) and effectiveness (AEC) (r = −0.646). Likewise, it is noted that more LS including the motor dimension is associated with a greater comprehensiveness (2D: r = 0.573) of the curricula (r = 0.721). Lastly, the association between the ‘motor’ and ‘cognitive’ dimension variables was reversed. The curricula analysis showed a very high level of standardisation of PE assessment, which was oriented towards the measuring of theoretical know-how, foregoing comprehensiveness. This trend underlines the curricula’s adopted neoliberal nature and their distancing from assessment models based on student participation and development. A more flexible, democratically constructed curriculum as well as assessment benchmarks are necessary in PE, where motor development and assessment become a means for holistic education.

Giving Teens a Voice: Sources of Stress for High School Students

Teen stress is a pressing health issue in the United States. Consistent, long-lasting stress can weaken the immune system and wear down physical reserves, leaving teens susceptible to negative mental and physical health outcomes. Recent legislation in the state of Virginia (HB1604/SB953) mandates the revision of the Health and Physical Education curriculum to incorporate standards of learning (SOL) that recognize mental health and the important connections between physical and mental health. The aim of our project was to create a survey that allows teens to have a voice in the conversation about revising the health SOL in response to student-reported stress and support factors. Using convenience sampling, high schoolers (n = 332) were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. To identify factors contributing to teen stress levels, participants were asked about their demographics, high school courses and activities, free time, and perception of the support they receive. Stress levels were then evaluated using Cohen’s validated 4-item Perceived Stress Scale. Regression and correlation analysis findings suggest that a student’s gender, homework level, amount of free and sleep time, perceived parental pressure, and family encouragement of relaxation predicted their perceived stress. Students who felt guilty taking time off or who worried about violence had higher stress levels than other teens, indicating that students’ emotions play a role in their stress perceptions. Results from this study can help school communities identify sources of teen stress and inform the development of educational instruction that helps students successfully reduce and cope with stress.

Dual Learning in an Emergency Medicine Clerkship Improves Student Performance

BackgroundThe emergency department (ED) is an ideal environment to teach learners about the “undifferentiated patient.” Student learning may be inconsistent because of inherent variability in the ED. Previous research has suggested that standardizing the emergency medicine (EM) clerkship by implementing didactics and requiring students to see patients with particular chief complaints improves educational outcomes. ObjectiveTo compare knowledge acquisition after a new curriculum to the traditional curriculum. MethodsThis was a prospective, quasiexperimental study of senior medical students in an EM clerkship. Students were assigned to the dual learning (DL) group or standard learning (SL) groups based on month of rotation. All were required to see patients with 10 specific chief complaints and were lent an EM textbook. The SL group was instructed to read about the required cases. The DL group attended a 2-hour didactic session covering 5 of the 10 required cases. All students completed an identical pre- and postclerkship multiple choice knowledge test. ResultsData from 51 medical students (DL = 27; SL = 24) were analyzed. Mean pretest scores were comparable between groups. A 2 (groups) by 2 (sessions) mixed-design analysis of variance yielded a significant group by session interaction effect (p < 0.001). The DL group significantly increased its mean score from 8.7 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.8) pretest to 11.6 (SD = 1.9) posttest; there was no improvement in the SL group (pretest: 9.3 [SD = 1.5], posttest: 10.0 [SD = 2.0]). ConclusionA DL model combining clinical and enhanced didactic requirements for an EM clerkship led to greater knowledge gain than the standard curriculum. This model may suggest ways to improve the educational experience in the EM clerkship.

Teacher Technology Integration Professional Development Model (SMART Board), Pre-Algebra Achievement, and Smart Board Proficiency Scores

The study investigated a teacher technology integration professional development model. The model focused on using SMART Board to improve pre-algebra achievement. The importance of the study was that the pre-algebra students at the middle school had a lower passing rate on the pre-algebra standard of learning (SOL) assessment for the past 3 years compared with other middle school students within the district and state. The methodology was guided by the single group pretest and posttest research design. Two research questions were investigated. Data were collected from four pre-algebra teachers and their combined 240 students using the pre-algebra SOL strand test and the SMART Board Technology Proficiency Survey. Results from the descriptive and inferential statistics showed the intervention increased students’ mathematics scores and teachers’ SMART Board proficiency scores from pretest to posttest.

Middle School A/B Block and Traditional Scheduling

The purpose of this quantitative study was to examine whether a difference existed in the percentage performance of students earning a pass/advanced score on the Standards of Learning (SOL) Test in math and reading in Virginia’s Region IV for schools using an A/B block schedule and those using a traditional schedule. The research also examined if the percentage performance by race—Black, Hispanic, and White—differed on the math and reading SOL Test for Region IV in Virginia. Forty-three schools were included in the study—23 block and 20 traditional schools. The percentage performance in math and reading of each school and the percentage performance by race for each school were studied. Analyses of variance and t tests were used to examine differences. The t-test results do not show significant differences in the percentage performance of students earning pass/advanced scores in reading and math in block and traditional schools. Significant differences were shown in the percentage of Black and Hispanic students earning pass/advanced scores on the math and reading SOL Test for Region IV in Virginia. A larger percentage of Black and Hispanic students earned pass/advanced scores in the A/B block-scheduled schools than in the traditional schools.

What is the Relationship Between Teacher Quality and Student Achievement? An Exploratory Study

The major purpose of the study was to examine what constitutes effective teaching as defined by measured increases in student learning with a focus on the instructional behaviors and practices. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analyses and hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) were used to identify teacher effectiveness levels while controlling for student-level and class/school-level variables. Actual achievement of 1936 third grade students in 85 classrooms on the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) Assessment results in English, Mathematics, Social Studies, and Science were compared to expected achievement resulting in an indicator of teacher effectiveness. Based on student learning gains, teachers were divided into quartiles. The statistical modeling approach facilitated comparisons of outcomes that were free of influences of identified extraneous variables. A double blind design was selected for in-depth cross-case studies with teachers from the highest quartile representing highly effective teachers (N = 5) and the lowest quartile the less effective teachers (N = 6). The observation team assessed the third grade teachers (N = 11) based 20 categories within four domains: instruction, student assessment, classroom management, and personal qualities. Key findings indicate that effective teachers scored higher across the four domains. Additionally, effective teachers tended to ask a greater number of higher level (e.g., analysis) questions and had fewer incidences of off-task behavior than ineffective teachers. The exploratory study identified instructional behaviors and practices of teachers that result in higher student learning gains.

Virginia's Excellent Adventure

THE VIRGINIA General Assembly is concerned that there remains a significant gap between the best- and poorest-performing Even as it acknowledged that most elementary and secondary are meeting academic achievement goals, the Assembly proceeded to request that information be collected on best practices used in high-performing and school divisions (districts) in the state. The resulting report, Review of Factors and Practices Associated with School Performance in Virginia, presents important findings. The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission -- established by the legislature as a free-standing agency to make independent and objective performance reviews of state programs and agencies -- conducted the study that the legislators requested. The study had two major research components: a quantitative analysis of the measurable factors associated with Standards of Learning (SOL) test results in and divisions and a qualitative review of and divisions. Project leader Hal Greer noted that researchers analyzed SOL test scores and the variables associated with them and visited 61 public in 35 school divisions, including high-scoring schools, low- scoring schools, schools that were exceeding predicted test scores, and schools with a large increase in test scores. Researchers held structured interviews with 11 superintendents and 61 principals. In addition, they conducted interviews with the state superintendent and with department of education officials, surveyed core-subject teachers in 56 of the 61 schools, and conducted literature and other document reviews. Six major findings resulted from the review: * Over the course of several years of SOL implementation, SOL test scores and pass rates have increased substantially. * However, a large percentage of the difference in the SOL test performance of and school divisions is still explained by the demographic characteristics of students and their communities. Further analysis revealed that the relationships between these factors and test scores could be partially explained by differences in teacher qualifications and experience, family support and structure, school and division characteristics, and local fiscal conditions. * Some of the challenged by these demographic factors have used best practices that have helped them to achieve success on the SOL tests, and these practices are identified in the report. * Support provided at the division level has a direct bearing on the success of individual schools, and successful divisions generally provide more support to their schools. Effective division practices are identified in this report. * In the divisions and visited for this review, superintendents, principals, and teachers generally indicate a belief that the SOLs have been helpful in improving the performance of their and students. * However, the Commonwealth and its public still face a number of challenges for the future, including addressing the needs of pupils served by where performance is not considered acceptable, responding to issues such as high dropout and retention rates, and meeting the expectations of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Specific Findings A number of the study's findings concerned relationships between poverty, race, adult educational attainment, and test scores. For example, teacher salaries are lower in divisions serving communities with a low proportion of college-educated adults. Teacher salaries in these areas are, on average, 13% lower than those in communities where a large proportion of adults are college educated. Per-pupil expenditures for instruction are also lower in communities with low adult educational attainment. Overall, the study identified nine practices used in with good SOL test results. …

Introducing Spectrophotometry in Grades 6–12 Using a College‐Based Spectrophotometer Loan Program

Science faculty members at Sweet Briar College have joined in partnership with area schools in a novel project bringing spectrophotometry to teachers and their students in grades 6–12. A sourcebook of classroom experiments has been created and field‐tested. These experiments are written around “real‐world” themes and problem solving scenarios and invoke an inquiry‐based (constructivist) approach to teaching and learning. The broad‐based theme that has emerged is “Light, Color, and Energy” which we tie into Virginia's Standards of Learning (SOLs) for each of the science classes that are involved. The College maintains and distributes a set of 21 Spectonic® Educator™ spectrophotometers that are used for summer professional development workshops for teachers and are loaned to trained teachers during the academic year. The 6th–12th grade classroom spectrophotometry experiences are also used in the education of future teachers, as project components are included in the College's pre‐service education courses. Undergraduate science students, interested in careers in education, have also contributed to the project in the development and testing of new classroom experiments. Funding for this project includes both external and internals funds, including an initial $42,000 investment from the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation's Special Grant Program in the Chemical Sciences (New York, NY) and the Richard and Caroline T. Gwathmey Trust (Richmond, VA).

Superintendents' responses to the achievement gap: an ethical critique

The authors have used an ethical perspective to critique superintendents' responses to the achievement gap as measured on standardized tests in Virginia (USA). The Standards of Learning (SOL) Tests have been administered for the past five years in grades three, five, eight and in 12 different high school courses. Findings from an empirical study reported elsewhere [Grogan, M. and Sherman, W. (2003) Superintendents in Virginia dealing with issues surrounding the black‐white test‐score gap. In D. Duke, M. Grogan, P. Tucker and W. Heinecke (eds) Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability (Albany, NY: SUNY Press)] have been interpreted using Starratt's (1994) multidimensional framework. Brief comments about the achievement gap and the current discourse on the superintendency introduce the paper. The study is then summarized and the findings discussed in the light of the theoretical lens.

Using Web-Based Computer Games to Meet the Demands of Today’s High-Stakes Testing

The State of Virginia’s Standards of Learning (SOL) curriculum identifies specific objectives for each grade level in the subjects of reading, math, science, and social studies, and assesses student mastery of those objectives at targeted grade levels. The third-grade social studies curriculum and test represent a particular challenge for teachers because they cover information taught from kindergarten through third grade over a wide variety of topics, including Ancient Civilizations, Famous Americans, Civics, Famous Explorers, and U.S. Holidays. To assist one school in reviewing for the third-grade exam, the first author developed a Web-based review tool using the formats of the popular television game shows Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? and Jeopardy! that actively engaged students in reviewing social studies material. This mixed-method study used both a quasi-experimental and a qualitative approach. In the quasi-experimental design, scores of students in one third-grade class who used the game to review for the SOL test were compared to scores of students in another class who reviewed for the exam using more traditional methods. Students in the Web-review treatment were extensively observed, recorded, and analyzed. Students in the Web-based review treatment did score higher in the SOL exam than students in the control group, but not significantly so. However, more importantly, the games promoted higher order learning outcomes such as increased meaningful dialogue among students and the identification of student misconceptions, both of which contributed to deeper student understanding.

Division in the Ranks: Standardized Testing Draws Lines between New and Veteran Teachers

In the end, Ms. Winkler found that variation in teachers' attitudes toward the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) test depended primarily on their own accrued time in the profession. Experienced teachers saw the test in terms of losses, while inexperienced teachers saw the test in terms of gains. IT IS HARD to believe that it's been three years since I taught English in an inner-city high school in Norfolk. I remember well the run-down 1950s-era building; its worn stairs, temperamental radiators, and dim hallways made for a less-than-stellar work environment. Its lack of air conditioning primed those of us who taught there for steamy afternoons and for students crankier than the crank-roll windows we wrestled with each morning. it wasn't the building or the sweaty teenagers that hastened my return to grad school; it was the way in which the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) test was implemented at my school. Allow me to issue a quick caveat. Though my experience with standards and standardized testing echoes the research of high-stakes testing opponents,1 I do not intend to reiterate the litany of complaints that they have documented so well already. My reason for conducting the study reported here and for writing this article certainly springs from my own desire to vent frustration over the perennial search for the pot of golden test scores at the end of the rote-recall rainbow. However, I must face one fact: not all teachers felt the threat to teaching freedom as I once did. In fact, many teachers welcomed the introduction into their classrooms of a highly structured, objective, and prescriptive test. It is this difference in teacher attitudes I wish to explore here. Initially, I interviewed and observed three Virginia teachers with at least nine years of experience. after each made remarks like, But Ms. Jones across the hall doesn't feel that I began to notice that the difference between the interviewed teacher and Ms. Jones was in years of experience. I decided to add three new teachers to my sample (those with less than two years of experience). Thus I spent roughly a year with six teachers, who taught at five different schools and represented the elementary, middle, and high school levels. In the end, it appeared that variation in the teachers' attitudes had less to do with how individual schools implemented the SOL test (what I thought would emerge as the key factor) than with a teacher's accrued time in the profession. In short, I found that new and veteran teachers' beliefs about the Virginia SOL test differed with regard to two areas: one having to do with broad losses and gains and one having to do with a teacher's sense of efficacy. Losses and Gains In a nutshell, experienced teachers saw the SOL test in terms of losses, while inexperienced teachers saw the test in terms of gains. The losses could be categorized into issues of power and professionalism for the veterans, and the gains could be categorized into issues of collaboration and pedagogical freedom for the new teachers. Both experienced teachers and inexperienced teachers saw the losses or gains as related to a philosophical construct. Experienced teachers often expressed frustration and indignation when talking about the SOL test. These emotions were rooted in the feeling that teachers had lost power as a result of the implementation of the test. On both the basic and superficial levels, this loss of power manifested itself in increased paperwork. The teachers talked of having to put the SOL numbers in their plans, on the board, on tests, and in handouts. One teacher said that the members of her department had to post a listing of their grade's SOL objectives on the classroom door and write in the date that each benchmark had been covered. That way, the department head could walk by and see at a glance which teachers had covered which SOL numbers and when -- essentially ensuring that teachers were pacing themselves in accordance with the curriculum guide. …

The Virginia History Standards and the Cold War

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH's approach to education policy has earned him cautious plaudits from otherwise hostile critics, who see much to admire in the implementation of standards for education. However useful such standards prove for testing students' technical skills like arithmetic and reading, they create problems for less-standardized processes like thinking about history. Some states, including Virginia, have already instituted Standards of Learning (SOLs) to lend coherence to history teaching throughout the state. But the Virginia SOLs' treatment of the Cold War provides ample warning about the perils of such state standardization.

Tips for Readers of Research: Scores, Ranks, and Percentages

PREVIOUS Tips for Readers of Research have included alerts to be aware whether you're dealing with ranks or scores or rates or numbers. (These tips are also found in my book Bail Me Out!). Recent trends in the reporting of test data require a new warning: reporting many people scored at a particular level or many people passed a cut score is the same thing as reporting the scores themselves. And it makes a difference whether these reports are from norm-referenced or criterion-referenced tests. Take the data released by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) as an example of reporting outcomes as how many people scored at a certain In addition to its scaled scores, NAEP reports the proportion of students scoring at levels it calls basic, proficient, and advanced. (The validity of these levels has been repudiated by virtually everyone outside NAEP and the U.S. Department of Education; unfortunately, the media slavishly write stories about the outcomes as if the levels were valid.) The data released on the state tests in Virginia, Texas, and many other states can serve as an example of reporting outcomes as how many people reached a cut score. Virginia reports what percentage of students passed the Standards of Learning (SOL) tests, and Texas provides the same information for the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). Such apparently straightforward reports can produce confusion in many ways. For instance, if 80% of the students pass the TAAS and 60% of the students pass the SOL, are Texas students doing better than Virginians? You can't tell from the information given. In fact, the SOL tests are tough with unreasonably high passing scores, and the TAAS is easy, its passing score corresponding to roughly the 25th percentile on a standardized test. This score reporting can get to be a very tricky business, indeed. An example of the kinds of confusion that the different reporting methods can produce appeared in the September 2000 issue of the Kappan. There, Carol Jago wrote, think I have finally figured out why California test scores declined from fourth grade to eighth grade and from eighth grade to 11th grade. It isn't that the longer students stay in school the dumber they get but that, while test items increase in difficulty, classroom instruction often does not (p. 90). Jago presented several examples of cases in which it would be difficult to guess the grade level from teachers dealt with a topic and of others in which a topic was introduced at one grade level and reviewed in a later grade level. My eyebrows arched a bit at this because test score items are calibrated to the difficulty of the materials students encounter. I asked Jago to provide me with the information from which she drew her conclusion. Here is part of what she sent. The percentage of California students scoring at or above the national norm for reading on the Stanford Achievement Test (SAT 9) in 1999: fourth grade, 42%; seventh grade, 44%; eighth grade, 47%; ninth grade, 34%; 10th grade, 33%; and 11th grade, 35%. There are several things to be seen in these data. First, these are test scores but the percentages of people who scored at a certain level - in this case, at or above the national norm. Second, even if they were test scores, we couldn't definitively say they go down, because these are scores from six different sets of students. To provide strong evidence for the hypothesis, we'd have to track, say, the fourth- graders through 11th grade. Third, the percentage at the national norm actually rises from fourth grade through eighth grade, then takes a large one-time dip from eighth to ninth grade (a fall replicated in other curriculum areas). Finally, because the data are normative, they cannot provide evidence for Jago's contention. To understand this, consider first the NAEP reports. Theoretically, 100% of all students who take the NAEP tests can score at the advanced level. …

Editorial

Editorial High Stakes Testing: Are the Stakes Too High? On balance, it appears to me that the impact of federal legislation and mandates on the education of deaf children has been positive. In addition to general education mandates for accountability and improved academic achievement , this includes legislation specific to our field such as the Education of the Deaf Act and special education legislation from the Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 to the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) of 1977. In fact, as this editorial is being prepared, it appears likely that Congress will "fully fund" up to 40% of the excess cost of educating a disabled child, a commitment that was made in 1975 but never honored. Perhaps the greatest potential benefit is exemplified by the IDEA stipulation that all children should have access to the general, or regular, curriculum. I am convinced that more deaf children from residential schools to neighborhood programs are exposed to a regular curriculum than ever before and that access to more rigorous standards has improved academic achievement. Of course, no new development is either completely positive or negative. We have had problems, for example, with a too enthusiastic embrace in some quarters of the mainstreaming/inclusion/zero reject/integration model(s) of school placement, and too many deaf children have suffered in isolation as a result of a misapplication of the least restrictive environment principle. However, my concern in this editorial is not with issues of placement but with the possibly deleterious effects on education of deaf children of the interaction of three seemingly very positive trends: access to the general education curriculum, upgrading the general education curriculum, and accountability. Until recently, I thought the issues were relatively simple. On the surface they are, but we are facing a potential mine field. I would like to discuss a few of these issues briefly. Most readers are aware that the federal government for years has been advocating improving the academic achievement of American children in the content areas of science, mathematics, social science, and literacy and has encouraged establishment of more rigorous curricula. Comparisons have been made internationally and among the states, and the federal government has issued reports that may be considered "report cards" identifying the highest achieving states and states showing the most improvement in various categories. The emphasis is on improvement and accountability. At first glance, the situation seems to be relatively straightforward . However, as all American educators know, we do not have a system of federal education, and the relationships between the federal government and the states are quite complex. In essence, all states are committed to improving academic achievement and to accountability. "Accountability" can mean different things to different people. High stakes testing has become a catch phrase in recent years, especially as it relates to accountability. In many states, a child must pass a statewide test in order to move from one grade to another or to graduate from high school. Although many educators and test developers decry tying one measure to such important decisions, the practice is common. The unit of analysis may be a teacher (class), principal (school), school superintendent (school district), or state director of education (state). High stakes testing can impact each of these areas. The scores of his or her students may heavily influence teacher evaluation and pay. Principals may get bonuses contingent upon schoolwide improvement on the tests. Schools may lose their accreditation if their students do less well than expected . There are cases of school superintendents promising to raise school district scores or leave. There is competition across states. The stakes are very high for everyone concerned. The tests themselves can vary from state to state. Even when the same tests are used, the cutoff standards may be different . The use of different tests can lead to differences in classroom instruction. For example, the two adjacent states of Virginia and Maryland have different approaches to testing. The Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) program tests of core areas of math, English, science, and social studies from elementary to high school are all multiple choice. The Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) Volume 145, No. 3, 2000 American Annals of the...