Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Youtube daily report Feb 21 2018

Hi, I'm Adriene Hill, and this is Crash Course Statistics.

So, for the last few episodes we've discussed ways to summarize data using numbers.

We used measures of central tendency and measures of spread.

But sometimes it can be helpful to actually *see* your data in addition to having numbers

to describe it.

Data visualizations are important to understand because you'll see them everyday.

In the news, on Facebook, in magazines.

Maybe I'll make an infographic of all the places we see data visualizations.

INTRO

There are two main types of data that we might encounter: categorical and quantitative.

Quantitative data are quantities, numbers that have both order and consistent spacing.

For example, how many ounces of olive oil are in each American home.

If three families told you how many ounces of olive oil they have, you could put them

in a meaningful order--from least to greatest, or greatest to least.

This order also has consistent spacing, an increase in 1 ounce of olive oil is the same

whether you go from 0 to 1 ounce, or from 100 to 101 ounces.

These properties allow us to do simple math with the data--like taking the mean or calculating

the standard deviation.

Categorical data doesn't have a meaningful order or consistent spacing.

For example, favorite kind of pasta.

You might like penne, rotini, linguine, or even Angel Hair, but there's no objective

way to put those pastas into a meaningful order.

Is penne truly better than linguine?

Where does rotini fit in?

It would be pasta madness to try to put them in order.

The simplest way to display categorical data is to make a frequency table.

A frequency table shows you all of the categories and the number of data points that fall in

that category (in other words, its frequency).

To change a frequency table into a relative frequency table, we just need to take each

raw frequency and divide by the number of total points to get a decimal between 0 and 1.

Some of you may be used to reading decimals as percentages, but if you're not, just

multiply by 100 to get the percentage.

For linguine we have 10/50 which is 0.2 or 20% of the group.

Relative frequency tables have the benefit of being easy to compare.

No matter what we're measuring or how many data points we have, it's easy to compare

percentages.

If 20% of people like linguine, we can see that's a smaller percent than the 67% of

people who like pineapple on pizza or greater than the 10% of my family who thinks statistics

are scary.

The relative frequency table for favorite pasta might look like this.

We can also add more than one variable to our frequency table.

We could ask people to rate their favorite pasta sauce and make a combined frequency

table, or a contingency table, of both pasta and sauce preference.

If I were planning a party, and needed to pick some pasta for the group, my best bets

would be Rotini with Red Sauce and Penne with Red or White sauce.

And because I'm planning a party and because I'm having food, I did look it up: the chance

of death by choking on food in the US in a given year is 1 in 100,686

But, sometimes we don't want just numbers in our visualization.

Earlier in the series, I talked about how it can be hard to wrap your head around numbers--especially

when they get really big or really small.

There are other more visual ways to represent categorical data.

One way to do this is with a bar chart.

A bar chart uses the frequencies that we saw in our frequency table to create bars that

have a height equal to the frequency.

That way, we can compare the height of bars instead of looking at raw numbers.

Here's a bar chart representing the pasta data we saw in our original frequency table.

You can see that penne is by *far* the most chosen pasta, and how it compares to Angel Hair.

Bar charts display a lot of information in a very simple graph, they can also display

the frequencies of multiple variables.

Let's say we want to compare each of these pasta types with either white or red sauce.

We can either stack frequencies so it gives us the same information as our contingency

table, or we can have bar charts side by side.

Pie charts are another way of displaying categorical data.

They use the relative frequency of categories to portion out pieces of a Circle, just like

a pie.

The higher the relative frequency, the bigger the slice of pie a category gets.

Pie charts are useful because our eyes are pretty good at comparing slices.

Our pasta data in a pie chart looks like this.

Pie charts are great at visually displaying one variable.

But they struggle to effectively display more than one variable, like our pasta and sauces

contingency table.

Another way to display categorical data is a pictograph.

Pictographs represent frequency with pictures.

A picture, like the ball in this basketball participation graph, will represent some number

of units, say 100 kids.

So if Riverdale High had 550 students participate in their basketball programs, then the graph

would show 5.5 basketballs.

Sometimes pictographs represent frequencies by increasing the size of the picture instead

and it's not wrong, but it's more difficult for us to visually compare, especially for

small differences, which can be misleading.

Plus, at a casual glance, we don't know what the size difference means.

Are we comparing the diameter of the basketballs?

Or are we comparing their areas?

*BREAKING NEWS*

This is Channel 2 News.

Looks like all you students out there are really hitting the books!

Data from the US Department of Education shows the graduation rate has been climbing!

So way to go everybody!

You're passing the test of life with flying colors!

Let's push that stack of books even higher!

So, that last pictograph...not at all to scale.

See how the stacks of books are not proportionate?

It shows a difference of 5% (from 75% - 80%) with a stack of books that is over *double*

the height of the 75% stack.

This makes the difference seem huge because the axis doesn't start at 0.

And yet, an increase of 80-81% is shown by two stacks that are BARELY different in height,

even though the 5% difference looks huge.

Always keep on eye on those axes.

Let's loop back to quantitative data, which as you'll remember, have a meaningful order

and consistent spacing.

Frequency tables can be used to display quantitative data, like age, or height, or ounces of olive

oil in your house.

We just have to create categories out of our quantitative data first.

We do that with a process called "binning".

Binning takes a quantitative variable and bins it into categories hthat are either pre-existing

or made up.

For example I can say that 0-15 oz of olive oil is "Very Little", 16-32 oz is "Average",

33-49 oz is "A Lot" and 50+ oz is "Excessive"--like suspiciously Excessive.

Like Will's 14 cats excessive.

Why do you need so much olive oil?

Anyway, once I've binned my data, I can create a frequency table or relative frequency

table, just like with our pasta example.

It might look something like this.

Binning is most useful when there's pre-existing "bins" for our data.

Like, you can divide age-in-years into the bins "Child", "Teen", "Adult"

and "Older Adult" because those are pre-existing categories.

We can also take a score on a depression test and create two bins: "clinically depressed"

and "not clinically depressed".

You can see from this example that bins don't HAVE to be equally spaced, but if you see

quantitative data that has been binned, make sure that the way it was divided up was appropriate

for the situation.

Unequally spaced bins can be misleading unless there's a real world distinction to back

it up.

Say politician X wants to make himself look popular, but it seems like people in their

30's really hate him.

(probably because he said that the reason they can't afford a house is their brunch

habit).

Politician X wants to hide the fact that over 80% of people in their 30's said they won't

vote for him.

So he does some "re-binning".

Traditionally the data are binned roughly by decade 18 years old to 29 years old, 30

years old to 39 years old, 40 to 49...you get the point.

But Mr. X needs to hide these hateful 30-somethings in the data.

The old chart looked like this:

But Politician X decided to split up the 30-somethings to make his numbers look better:

He moved the data around to hide the glaring group of 30 year old dissenters.

Instead of showing the truth that 30-somethings despise him, we see a more...positive view

of his popularity.

By splitting the 30-somethings and putting some of them into two other, larger groups,

he can obscure their political dissatisfaction.

Looking at this new table, he'd win the popularity vote in each of the 5 new bins.

If I don't show you the number of voters per bin, it seems legit...

Another categorical graphing method we can apply to quantitative data is bar charts.

When we use bar charts for quantitative data, we squish the bars together so that they're

touching and we call them histograms.

The bars are squished together because the data are 'continuous' which means the

values in one bar flow into the next bar, there's no separation like in our categorical

bar charts.

In histograms, like bar charts, the height of the bars tell us how frequently data in

a certain range occur.

A histogram also gives us information about how the data is distributed.

We can estimate where the mean, median and mode of our data are as well as see how spread

out the data is.

Look at this histogram for our olive oil data.

For this histogram, we can see that the range of the data is approximately 85 since it covers

value 0-85 ounces and that it's right skewed (the tail is to the right), and that it's

center is around 25 ounces.

The histogram gives us more information about the data than a frequency table does, but

they're still obscuring WHAT the specific data values are.

If you read the news--or watch the news--you will see these representations over and over

and over.

You will likely see far more of these charts and graph than you will create.

The big take away here, as a consumer of these things, is to look closely at what the visualization

is actually telling you.

Or maybe trying to hide from you.

These charts and graphs give us another way to comprehend numbers--to see the big picture.

Thanks for watching!

I'll see you next week.

For more infomation >> Data Visualization: Part 1: Crash Course Statistics #5 - Duration: 10:22.

-------------------------------------------

One Lane Tunnel to Love's Travel Stop, Benson, Arizona from Dragoon on I-10 West GP072352 - Duration: 26:05.

Interstate 10 West, Dragoon, Arizona, 11 August 2016

Exit 318, Dragoon Rd, Red Jeep

Slower Traffic Keep Right

Slower Traffic Keep Right

Crossover

GP

Wyoming's Silver Subaru

Crossover

Budget Truck trailers U-Haul

Crossover

Sibyl Rd

Bridge

SAIA

Exit 312, Sibyl Rd, Benson, Arizona

Landstar

The Thing?

The Thing, Exit 322

Crossover

CRUM

CRST

The Thing?

C.R. England

FedEx

The Thing?

FedEx

Indian Express, Moreno Valley, CA

The Thing?

Train

UPS

Crossover

Electrical Substation

Swift

White Ford F-150

John Chistner Trucking

US Border Patrol Truck

The Thing?

The Thing?

Crossover

Speed Limit 45

Parkway

Car Carrier

Crossover

Pomerene Rd

Bridge 31.966536, -110.273420

Pomerene Rd

Speed Limit 75

Watch for Water on Road

Crossover, Exit 306

GTX

XTRA

Porta Potty

Bridge over Creek

Penske

Crossover

Black Nissan Altima 3.5 SR

Blue Hyundai

Penske

Chevron Exit

E

Yucca Plant

Ocotillo Ave

Bridge

Texaco

FedEx

The Thing?

The Thng? Exit 322

XTRA

The Thing?

Crossover

Exit 304, Ocotillo Ave, 1/2 Mile

Bridge over Railroad Track

Cooper

4th St

Bridge

4th St

Transport America

Swift

Celadon https://celadontrucking.com/

Crossover

Slower Traffic Keep Right

MVT, Mesilla Valley Transportation

I'm alive

Love's Travel Stop

McDonald's, 618 S State Hwy 90, Benson, AZ 85602 mcdonalds.com (520) 586-7337

State Route 90

State Route 90

Comfort Inn, 630 S Village Loop, Benson, AZ 85602 choicehotels.com (520) 586-8800

Crossover

Exit 303, Tombstone, Douglas, 1 1/2 Mile, Business 10, AZ-80

Exit 302, AZ-90 East, Ft Huachuca, Sierra Vista

Car Carrier

Crossover

No Median Barrier, Next 30 Miles

W

Benson, Next 4 Exits

FedEx

Crossover

FedEx

E

Tank

Steal Tank Cobble Job

Fed Ex

Exit 302, Motel 6

SE, Shippers Express

Exit 299

One Lane Tunnel, Sound Horn, 14ft 2in

One Lane Tunnel, Sound Horn

JAG

SAIA

White Buick

Crossover

Brown UPS Worldwide Services Vehicle, 1-800 Pick UPs www.ups.com

CAT

Copper Star Transportation LLC

520-312-0411

Cell Tower

US Flag

Crossover

White Toyota Tundra, V8

White Saturn

Grey Chrysler Van, Gentle Care Transport Inc.

Grey Car

White Chevrolet Car

White Car

Exit 302

Silver Honda

amazon Prime

Love's, Subway, Chesters

H3 Hummer

Gas Pump

Swift

ups

Love's Tanker

Propane Tanker

Tanker

1st

Cox

Girl in Long Black & White Stripped Dress

For more infomation >> One Lane Tunnel to Love's Travel Stop, Benson, Arizona from Dragoon on I-10 West GP072352 - Duration: 26:05.

-------------------------------------------

Volkswagen Golf 1.0 TSI 85KW 115 PK Automaat 7 traps Connected Series - Duration: 1:01.

For more infomation >> Volkswagen Golf 1.0 TSI 85KW 115 PK Automaat 7 traps Connected Series - Duration: 1:01.

-------------------------------------------

Sebastián Yatra - SUTRA

For more infomation >> Sebastián Yatra - SUTRA

-------------------------------------------

Stocks Ex Dividend Next Week JNJ, K, D, NEE, SON, MGEE - 4 WITH 10+ YEARS OF INCREASING DIVIDENDS! - Duration: 19:09.

hello everyone and thanks for tuning into the financial investor channel my

name is Brent and today we're going to be doing our five stocks of the

ex-dividend snack week so I've already gone over to dividend calm and did my

ex-dividend search I'm looking for dates February 26 through March 2nd we are on

the very last week of February so 2 week or 2 months down in 2018 so we're going

to be doing here is we're gonna be adding all of our stocks here that are

rated at a 3.93 three point four so Nike being the last one now these are all

rated using the DARS system which measures the dividend stocks next four

quarters whether they're looking to be profitable it looks at their dividend

increases over the last few years so they have a reputable do they increase

their dividend year over a year over a year over a year

you know Johnson & Johnson is one of those I believe it's been paying out

dividends for 43 years so it's gonna be rated very nicely same with Bank of

Hawaii and such it also takes a look at the percentage increase when they

increase their dividend by how much do they increase their dividend and it

matches a few other statistics and such so that's what the rating is from now

anything below a three point three is considered neutral or you know not

exactly a buy or sell is just sort of in the middle so we're gonna be including

all of our three point nine three three point for stocks into y charts so I do

have a video displaying hi you guys have access Y charts for free so if you guys

would like up in the top right corner you can click on the link and check out

that video right after that one so all I'm gonna do here is begin entering the

ticker symbols over on Y charts because that's how we're going to be screening

these stocks we're gonna be taking a look first at what stocks

have a priced earnings greater than 25 so we don't want anything greater than

what the S&P 500 is currently training it because if that thing crashes and our

whole market crashes it's nice that our stock is not gonna come tumbling down

too hard you know it might fall 10 20 30 % but if you're trading at a price

earnings at around 20 25 or less you know even 9 a lot of times those stocks

are not going to be unprofitable see we left off here at Sun so let's move here

down a little bit and now we can start with WCN so that's why I like to have a

you know price p/e ratio around 25 or lower anything lowers cuz you know nice

so there's quite a few names in here that I can recognize we had Johnson &

Johnson's we had la cara Goldman Sachs we have a few others in there hold on I

can't think of the names as I'm seeing the ticker symbols it's popping other

names into my head besides the one that I'm even thinking of so we have Merck

Mikkel occur and then Pai BW a JK HW never heard of Jack Henry Associates so

that's a funny one we have triple L looks like a communications

saft a JG so quite a few names here that I do not recognize which is why I do

these five stocks that seven is next week it's nice to get some exposure to

stocks that are not always on the headlines I like to look out for stocks

that could be potential buys but nobody is talking about them because they're

not brand names so a lot of times have you ever heard of Principal Financial

Group more than likely a lot of people out there are never gonna have heard of

it whereas if you have you heard of Procter & Gamble yes you've heard of

Procter & Gamble you've heard of the craziness that's been going on with

their whole tide challenge and then we have Nike there which is our

last one so we do have coca-cola CCE which is our coca-cola enterprises here

and then it kind of goes on from there so we're not gonna clear those we

already have a ginormous list here to kind of cover and thin down now so now

that we have our strongest stocks picked out for next week we picked out all the

stocks that have a rating of 3.4 or higher so the next step here is I take

about ten of them and what I'm going to be doing is look at their p/e ratio and

I'm going to be removing stocks that have a p/e ratio less than 25 so that's

my first step so we're looking at percentages right now so I'm gonna go

ahead and go like this now Johnson & Johnson here they had a weird last

quarter if I go over to Morningstar I look at their financials for Johnson &

Johnson it's actually trading right now in a twenty three point two so I'm gonna

go ahead and leave it in my list whereas if we look at Great Plains energy which

is ticker symbol GXP GXP so some of these stocks the information is correct

see that's one hundred and sixty nine point six that's just showing one fifty

six point eight four so grant and Great Plains energy that one can just be

removed I'm not going to even bother so we still have a few other ones Lockheed

Martin while it's a great stock defensive stock that price earning right

now is very high so it could be considered you know

over

/ - hi I cannot think of the word right now having brain farts see we have Pepsi

in the list here but a p/e ratio f32 so that's kind of leave us with a you know

these socks you're gonna have a price earnings less than 25 so I'm going to go

ahead and go into my next group and then I'm gonna go ahead and do this for the

remainder of these stocks and then afterwards I will be right back okay

okay so we thinned down our list all of these socks have a PE lesson 25 beside

Johnson & Johnson which we verified is does have a PE lesson 25 outside of

twenty three point two so next step is to remove yields stocks that have a

yield less than two you know one you know for every hundred dollars you would

only get one dollar back in that yield so I don't want to bother looking for

stocks you know we're in a down you know we just came out of a correction where

stocks fell ten percent at least so some of these stocks that have a yield of

zero you know anything less than two you don't want to be getting anything less

than two bucks for every $100 that you're investing I mean if you think the

stock is great that's one thing and it has growth but if we're gonna be buying

and holding for the long term we want that dividend increase I don't know

which one I just removed but there we go we have three here so now all we're

doing is just kind of thinning it down so we're gonna be getting stocks that

have yields greater than two so this is really gonna thin it down

here really all the way down here all say so

now we are left with a few socks here that all have yields greater than two so

so what are we down until we have two four six eight stocks so next thing

we're going to be looking for is increasing net income revenue and free

cash flow is one that I like to look for but now they come in revenue is always

nice to have decreasing free cash flow could just mean that they've gone

through some acquisitions so here Johnson & Johnson the reason that they

had such a high p/e ratio is maybe during their last quarter that it was

reported their earnings dropped or it wasn't really reported on this website

correctly so here this would have to do some double-checking I do not believe

Johnson and Johnson what it fell you know that fast and their last let's

remove the so they would have had to have gone from

18 billion dollars in net income to 1.3 so I don't think this is correct here so

I'm gonna go ahead and just leave Johnson & Johnson I'm gonna go ahead and

continue to include it in my list now I'm gonna go back here and do percentage

way so we have decreasing that income decreasing revenue over the last ten

years so Bank of Hawaii can be gallant Kellogg's is up in revenue you know it

stays up pretty decent in revenue their net income has had some spikes but they

look to be coming back and their free cash flow is positive so we'll go ahead

and leave them Dominion energy over the last ten years see where are they losing

out on so here they're free cash flow is down utility company utility companies

they do a lot of acquisitions they buy stuff so the revenue is down 22% if we

remove their free cash flow and put in their net income so they've probably

gone through different acquisitions which is why their free cash flows down

but those acquisitions match up so with their doesn't it doesn't let me pop it

in so here you can see these decreases in free cash flow and then spikes back

up decreases spikes back up and if we take if we just look at their net income

here it kind of goes along with their

acquisition so their free cash flow they drop down for an acquisition and then it

picks right back up because they acquired someone and it brought them

quite a bit of revenue and net income and then they acquired something else

and that looks pretty decent so I'm gonna go ahead and leave that one in

there as well because that looks it's responsible here we have a positive one

net income positive two hundred and twenty eight percent over the last ten

years their net their free cash flow is positive and their revenue is positive

so it looks good as well Sunoco their free cash flows down but

their net income and their freaking and their revenue is positive so so now go

they are a furnished furniture company I believe they they

see their paper or furniture they do pretty good stuff so I'm gonna leave

them as well and that looks good and we have some negative net income and free

cash flow so we're actually left with six decent looking socks here so without

diving too much further into them all we have Johnson and Johnson

we have Kellogg's actually I guess we could take a look at the price and they

yield right now and see just over the year where are they currently sitting in

that price that yield so right now Johnson & Johnson over the

last year it currently has a higher yield than price which had been it could

be considered undervalued at this time the last time you would have been able

to buy Johnson & Johnson at this price would have been back in 2017 right

around you know mid mid-june area you would have been able to buy this at a

2.5 4% yield and around 130 dollar price so this one Johnson & Johnson could be

considered currently undervalued at this time just due to the correction that

took place it may be trying to get its roots back it also may have taken a dive

future earnings so definitely take a look into that when kellogg's looks like

right now it's you know it's price is over the yield but it is averaged out

you can see that there were times when you could have bought the stock at

nearly a three point six percent yield whereas now it is trading at around a

three yield we have Dominion energy you're

getting this at the highest yield in the last

you know I don't think those it looked like it's ever been at a 4% yield okay

it has back in 2013 this stock it did drop here for a minute and that was

about the last time you could have got it for a yield of 4% so the last time

you could have bought Dominion energy it was back in 2013 there was a little dip

here where the price fell down and the yield shot up above a 4% but then that

stock has just been on the up-and-up you can see here during the 2008 crash that

took place this stock did come down but then after her around 2013 it looks like

it recovered so within 5 4 to 5 year period it did recover the price loss and

then continue up saying with Kellogg's here you can see here 2008 correction

only affected him for around 2 years and then they're beginning to trade sideways

and then have been positive since then Johnson & Johnson 2008 correction it

fazed them a little bit you would have still got paid out dividends doesn't

look like you would have made your return positive until 2013

we have next arrow energy here so over the year here they are traded in a price

above yield so they could be overvalued at this current time but over the last

10 years you can see here that they did fall during the 2008 recession then they

didn't hit back at their price point till around midpoint 2012 almost 2013

but then have been on a nice steady increase since then we have Sunoco for

this current time that they're trading they are trading that yield above price

of the last time you will be able to buy them with a yield above three would have

been back in August September of 2017 so during after you know after October

they took off they actually went up into the 55 $56 range they did come down as

they are you know I currently trading at a forty nine dollars and eleven cents

and they yield over three so over the last ten years if you had bought this

stock during you know prior to the correction you would have dipped and

then you would have recovered sometime in 2011 so that would have been about a

three year period well you would have had to just buy and hold and average

down on your loss until it picked back up and then you know everything dipped

right in this time frame again but then if you you know if you hold it for the

long term more than likely you would come up positive just in the long term

short term MGE yield is at a two point three which is one of the highest fields

you would have been able to buy this since 2016 about mid-year is when this

stock was at around a 2.3 priced around a $48 point and now they've had some

dividend increases you know a lot of these Sox here they do increase their

dividend year over year and this is just one of them we can actually take a quick

look now we won't do that I guess we could do the how long they've been

paying out dividends very quickly here so first one here is Johnson & Johnson

followed right behind by Kellogg's and then we have ticker symbol D then we

have ticker symbol and E E then we have senado Sunoco and then M GE e so Johnson

& Johnson dividends for 55 years they're great look in stock Kellogg's for 13

years Dominion energy this is the electric company they've been paying out

dividends for nine years so a lot of things you have to take a look at payout

ratios 41 percent which is pretty low dividend growth has been very nice

Kellogg's payout ratio under sixty percent dividend growth over ten years

so they've paid out during recessions Dominion resource they cut their

dividend or pulled it back in 2009 they are paying out over sixty percent but

their utilities company we have next era energy dividend growth for the last

eight years since 2010 so they may have cut it or a hole to dip and then they

are today who have a payout ratio less than sixty so Naoko they have a panel

ratio less than sixty which is pretty nice they've been paying out dividends

for 37 years and then we have em GE Energy which is that 42 years of

dividend increases and then a payout ratio of 56 so pretty good-looking

companies so a few of these here so Johnson & Johnson over 10 years

Kellogg's over 10 years we have Sunoco over 10 years and mg energy over 10

years so all of those stocks just about you know if we remove these four and

just went with Johnson & Johnson Kellogg's

Sonoco and MGE those ones have been paying out during recessions during

multiple recessions so those would be some of your safest bats so that is it

for this video so again our undervalued ones that are currently you know they

look undervalued definitely do a little bit more research but be MGE Sunoco

Johnson & Johnson Dominion energy and that is it so four of those Sox look

like they're currently under valued at this current time just use the

correction that took place so definitely do your own research if you would like

to you know get involved in any of those stocks take a look at their 10ks

go over their last quarters what are what are they doing this year what are

they going to be doing next year what have they done in the last four or five

years and such so that is it for this video if you have enjoyed the video

remember to hit the like comment remember to hit the like leave a comment

below remember to subscribe from future financial videos if you have any

questions about what was covered today I know we went through your pretty quick

just kind of scanning through looking for some stocks with X divin is next

week that had a PE lesson 25 yields greater than 2 these all have increasing

revenue net income and their free cash flow while it is important decreasing

free cash flow could be that they're new and acquisitions they're buying other

companies they're acquiring other little small companies so definitely read those

10 case to see what they've done but everything else looked pretty positive

you know they they've all gone through recessions they've all recovered through

recessions four of them have paid out dividends for more than 20 years so

definitely check those four stocks out Johnson & Johnson Kellogg's Sunoco and

mg EE so thank you guys for watching I will see you next time have a great day

bye

For more infomation >> Stocks Ex Dividend Next Week JNJ, K, D, NEE, SON, MGEE - 4 WITH 10+ YEARS OF INCREASING DIVIDENDS! - Duration: 19:09.

-------------------------------------------

Internal Relief - Form-Master Shear and D'Andrea Adapter - 15-5 Stainless - Duration: 2:18.

Tool: Radius Slotter 35B4H-35050AZ-11 (2916579) Insert: RJLT1304MON IN7035 (6193555)

Tool: Radius Slotter 35B4H-35050AZ-11 (2916579) Insert: RJLT1304MON IN7035 (6193555)

Adapter: D'Andrea CAT50 UNC MHD63.56 RAV 63/50.220 PF 50 3/4

SFM: 483, RPM: 528, IPM: 85, IPT: .032, DOC: .030/Rev, WOC:.025 Radial

Tool: Radius Slotter 35B4H-35050AZ-11 (2916579) Insert: RJLT1304MON IN7035 (6193555)

Adapter: D'Andrea CAT50 UNC MHD63.56 RAV 63/50.220 PF 50 3/4

SFM: 483, RPM: 528, IPM: 85, IPT: .032, DOC: .030/Rev, WOC:.025 Radial

Tool: Radius Slotter 35B4H-35050AZ-11 (2916579) Insert: RJLT1304MON IN7035 (6193555)

Adapter: D'Andrea CAT50 UNC MHD63.56 RAV 63/50.220 PF 50 3/4

SFM: 483, RPM: 528, IPM: 85, IPT: .032, DOC: .030/Rev, WOC:.025 Radial

For more infomation >> Internal Relief - Form-Master Shear and D'Andrea Adapter - 15-5 Stainless - Duration: 2:18.

-------------------------------------------

Mercedes-Benz GLE-Klasse GLE 350 d Coupé 4-Matic AMG Line Night Automaat, Panoramadak - Duration: 0:59.

For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz GLE-Klasse GLE 350 d Coupé 4-Matic AMG Line Night Automaat, Panoramadak - Duration: 0:59.

-------------------------------------------

Mercedes-Benz GLE-Klasse Coupé GLE 350 d Coupé 4-Matic AMG Line - Duration: 0:59.

For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz GLE-Klasse Coupé GLE 350 d Coupé 4-Matic AMG Line - Duration: 0:59.

-------------------------------------------

Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse S 350 d 4MATIC Lang AMG Line - Duration: 0:58.

For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse S 350 d 4MATIC Lang AMG Line - Duration: 0:58.

-------------------------------------------

Ces plantes purifient l'air en 6 heures - France 365 - Duration: 7:05.

For more infomation >> Ces plantes purifient l'air en 6 heures - France 365 - Duration: 7:05.

-------------------------------------------

Gingivitis and periodontitis - causes, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, pathology - Duration: 8:51.

With gingivitis, gingiva refers to the gums, and -itis refers to inflammation, so gingivitis

is inflammation of the gums.

With periodontitis, peri- means around, and odon-, refers to the tooth, so it's inflammation

and destruction of the supporting structures around the teeth.

Broadly speaking, the two are on a spectrum starting with simple gingivitis on one end,

and if the process doesn't get treated, it can develop into more severe disease - periodontitis,

which is on the other end of the spectrum.

Let's start by building a model of a tooth and its surrounding structures.

In the mouth, the bone beneath the bottom row of teeth is the mandible, and the bone

above the top row of teeth is the maxilla.

Both bones have an alveolus, or socket, for each tooth.

The socket is lined on the inside by a periodontal ligament.

Protecting the alveolus on the outside, is a layer of soft, supportive tissue called

the gingiva, or gums, that sits on top of the bone.

The tooth itself can be roughly divided into two parts.

The first part is the root, and it sits within the alveolus.

The root is covered by a bonelike substance called cementum, and that's what the periodontal

ligament's fibers attach to.

Next, there's a short zone called the neck, which is the transition between the root and

the crown.

The crown is the visible part of the tooth that protrudes from the gingiva, and it's

covered in enamel.

Enamel has such a high mineral content that it's the hardest substance in the human

body.

The portion of gingiva that sticks up and is not anchored to the tooth is sometimes

called the free gingiva, and the space between the free gingiva and the crown is called the

gingival crevice or gingival sulcus.

A watery substance called gingival crevicular fluid flows into this space in small amounts.

Gingival crevicular fluid contains various immune proteins and cells like neutrophils,

complement proteins, and antibodies.

Within the mouth there are a number of bacterial organisms.

In a healthy mouth, there is a balance of commensal bacteria that compete with each

other, and they are all kept in check by immune factors in the mouth.

Gingivitis and periodontitis represent a state of imbalance or dysbiosis.

This is when there's a relative increase in pathogenic bacteria either because of a

lack of competition with other commensal bacteria or because of an ineffective immune response

in the mouth.

The pathogenic bacteria form dental plaque which is a sticky collection of bacteria,

proteins from saliva, and dead cells from the lining of the mouth.

Individual bacteria multiply and form many small microcolonies that coalesce, creating

a layer of dental plaque - which is a type of biofilm.

Compared to a microcolony, the bacteria in a biofilm communicate with each other via

chemical signaling and together they create a complex system where some bacteria work

on tunneling between the microcolonies and to the surface in order to bring in a steady

supply of food.

As an analogy, if bacteria were ants, then a microcolony would be a tiny group of ants,

each doing it's own thing, whereas a biofilm would be an ant farm with complex tunnels

and rooms, and each ant carrying out a specialized task.

Some tooth surfaces like the portion of the tooth just outside the gingiva are hard to

brush dental plaque away from.

If dental plaque above the gingiva keeps building, the bacteria within that biofilm can invade

beneath the gingiva where it becomes very difficult to reach with brushing.

Eventually, it can form a hard mass, called a dental calculus.

Dental calculus creates a nice space for bacterial plaque formation, because it's hard to remove,

and from there bacteria can enter the gingival sulcus and cause gingival inflammation, or

gingivitis.

Damaged gingival cells release inflammatory signals that recruit neutrophils to the area,

and those neutrophils can release harmful chemicals that kill bacteria, as well as damage

the nearby tissue.

Fortunately, simple gingivitis is a reversible condition, and the damaged tissue can heal

over time as long as the infection is stopped and treated.

In periodontitis, the process of dysbiosis is often more extreme - with even more disease-causing

bacteria flourishing in the mouth.

One classic hypothesis suggests that the first step in periodontitis is the presence of the

so-called orange-complex of bacteria, which includes gram-negative anaerobic bacteria

like Fusobacterium nucleatum and Prevotella intermedia.

Once these orange-complex bacteria are established, the next step is the presence of the so-called

red-complex of bacteria, which includes Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola and, its most

notorious member, Porphyromonas gingivalis or P. gingivalis for short.

Another line of thinking suggests that rather than these red-complex bacteria being the

specific culprits, it's the overall change in the bacterial community that these bacteria

trigger that tips the scale toward periodontitis.

Either way, the pathogenic bacteria within the subgingival dental plaque create a periodontal

pocket and damage gingival cells in the process.

Local mast cells and nerves release chemicals like histamine and substance P which cause

dilation of local blood vessels, resulting in swelling of the gingiva.

Damaged gingival cells release additional cytokines like interleukin-1, which brings

more immune cells to the area, like neutrophils and macrophages.

The body's immune response causes even more damage to the gingiva and periodontal ligament,

ultimately loosening the tooth.

That one notorious bacterium P. gingivalis, is also known for impairing the immune cells

from effectively killing bacteria.

This helps other pathogenic bacteria to overgrow as well - kind of like a thief that destroys

the police station and allows other thieves to flourish in a city.

The immune response also delivers more blood flow to the damaged tissue, and that provides

nutrients for the bacteria.

Together, the bacteria and immune response end up in a positive-feedback loop where the

expanding infection causes an increased immune response, which doesn't destroy the bacteria

but provides the bacteria with more fuel to grow.

The immune response also activate osteoclasts in the bone, which start to dissolve the bone

supporting the tooth, loosening it even more.

Symptoms of gingivitis typically include redness, swelling, and bleeding - especially after

brushing or flossing.

Some people though experience no symptoms, especially in the early stages of infection.

Severe disease that progresses to periodontitis can result in tooth loss.

Diagnosis of gingivitis and periodontitis are usually made by looking for swollen or

bleeding gums, probing of each gingival sulcus to determine how deep it is, and X-rays to

evaluate the bone level.

With inflammation and destruction, the sulcus becomes deeper as the periodontal pocket expands.

Treatment depends on how severe the infection is.

Daily brushing and flossing, and use of antimicrobial agents like mouthwashes, can help prevent

the formation of dental plaque, but in severe cases antibiotic and surgery might be needed.

All right, as a quick recap…

Gingivitis is caused by infection and inflammation of the gingiva that can grow to involve the

tooth supporting structures, which is called periodontitis.

When dental plaque builds up near the gumline, it can allow bacteria to invade toward the

root of the tooth.

Diagnosis is done via visual inspection, X-rays, and probing the gums, and treatment of severe

cases may include removal of the infected tissue, antibiotics, and surgery.

For more infomation >> Gingivitis and periodontitis - causes, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, pathology - Duration: 8:51.

-------------------------------------------

Kokubuncho, Sendai by Night - Miyagi - 国分町, 仙台市 - 4K Ultra HD - Duration: 5:00.

Capital city of Miyagi Prefecture, Sendai, with a population of over one million, covers a total area of over 780 km2.

Founded in 1600 by Date Masamune who aslo happen to have its mausoleum Zuihoden near the city center.

Sendai features some of Tohoku's most famous festivals like for the Tanabata Matsuri.

In today's video, we will explore Sendai's most famous nightlife district; Kokubuncho

For more infomation >> Kokubuncho, Sendai by Night - Miyagi - 国分町, 仙台市 - 4K Ultra HD - Duration: 5:00.

-------------------------------------------

How to wash the close - Duration: 3:49.

hi I'm Steven someday you have zero closes that smell good

so you have zero choice you have to wash the closes so today I learn you

how to do the wash with Steven follow me

okay first of it you open the Machine door like this put the detergent in the

in the that like this

now very important

put the cash

got the trent sous put trees fours fives and seven and now oh yeah

you insert the close in the machine

there you go

it's not the problem one second

come on

there you go allright

don't forget the chemise

super easy push the button and now you can go for about

forteen five minutes and come back

see you later

Oh yeah

now the wash is finish but the closes is wet so you have to

put in the chesseuse

to make still not wet still anymore

super easy

plastic bag

take the closes and put in the chesseuse and

choose the cycle like very very dry and push there you go now can come back in

there you go now can come back in

one hours fouf forteen minutes something like that anyway

take care

hum oh it's finish so open the machine door and

Wow smells so good

and take the closes and you put in a bag of the plastic like me

It's Easy

few things forget

it's not grave

close the door

and load this

like that

and now go home

For more infomation >> How to wash the close - Duration: 3:49.

-------------------------------------------

Bilan 21 jours sans sucre (jour 14) Soirée Cinéma: Black Panther | vlog Montreal - Duration: 10:40.

For more infomation >> Bilan 21 jours sans sucre (jour 14) Soirée Cinéma: Black Panther | vlog Montreal - Duration: 10:40.

-------------------------------------------

Ruger SR40c IWB Holster for Concealed Carry - Alien Gear Holsters - Duration: 3:22.

Upgrade your Ruger SR9c or SR40c to a whole new level of comfort and concealment with

the ShapeShift 4.0 IWB Holster.

Improving on the award-winning Cloak Tuck 3.0, the ShapeShift 4.0 has a single mounting

point, allowing the holster base to flex and conform to your side.

This, combined with an all-new layer of breathable CoolVent neoprene, delivers the most comfort

possible without any exposed hardware against your skin.

The 4.0 is now edge bound and wraps completely around the holster; unifying every layer,

giving you a pristine and practical form factor which not only looks great, but feels exceptional.

Our textured 4.0 Alien Skin covers the surface of the holster, providing the perfect drag

to your draw.

Drawing and holstering has never felt more secure.

The ergonomical quick draw cut on the side, has been specifically engineered to give you

the best full firing grip possible.

Our ShiftShell is made of a durable, premium polymer allowing for a unique form of retention.

An adjustable retention unit locks your firearm into place with an audible click; and is customizable

for a tighter or looser draw.

Cant and ride height are also customizable with a set of exclusive tool-less clips.

The base of the holster contains a stainless spring-steel core that retains a consistent

shape no matter how intense your activity level is.

The ShapeShift 4.0 has been designed for safety; as the trigger is completely covered at every

angle; all the way to the grip of the gun.

You'll have peace of mind knowing that the trigger will only be touched when and where

you want.

Our team has managed to expedite the 4.0's changeability to accommodate your carrying

needs.

It's now easier than ever before with only a twist and a slide.

This revolutionary holster is fully compatible with the entire ShapeShift system, allowing

you to effortlessly shift to any of our OWB, IWB and tactical holsters.

Our holsters are made in America and include only the best high-quality materials that

we back with a Forever Warranty and a 30-Day Test Drive.

Join the future of concealed carry.

Available now at AlienGearHolsters.com

For more infomation >> Ruger SR40c IWB Holster for Concealed Carry - Alien Gear Holsters - Duration: 3:22.

-------------------------------------------

Sandy Berger, Consumer Electronics Expert, Talks Voice Assistants! - Duration: 1:00:58.

For more infomation >> Sandy Berger, Consumer Electronics Expert, Talks Voice Assistants! - Duration: 1:00:58.

-------------------------------------------

Bremain - The Buddha of Suburbia (David Bowie) - Duration: 5:38.

For more infomation >> Bremain - The Buddha of Suburbia (David Bowie) - Duration: 5:38.

-------------------------------------------

Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - JMU Campus Climate (Video 3 of 5) - Duration: 11:49.

Alright so today in this video we're going to be talking about section 2 of

our Madison Matters study which talks about JMU's campus climate and

specifically we're going to delve into sort of students perception of the

campus in terms of whether they feel like they belong on campus, their

perceptions of interconnectedness, and things such as that.

So to specifically talk about section II we're going to be looking at these

four scales. The first one is sense of belonging, the

second one is perception of connectedness, the third is acceptance of

diversity, and the fourth is diversity and inclusivity. As we go on through this

video we're going to touch on the different slides and sort of explain what these

scales look for what are some examples of some questions and we're also going

to look at the internal reliability that these scales have as well. So one of the

first things we're looking at is sense of belonging and this is a student's

personal sense of belonging to JMU. In order to measure that it is a six

item scale that we use it has an internal reliability of .92 which

is fairly high. An example of one of the questions that we did ask our

participants was "I feel a sense of belonging to the JMU campus community." As

we can see we use a six point Likert scale that goes from strongly disagree

to strongly agree. So the next series of slides were going to be talking about group

differences when it comes to sense of belonging to JMU's campus. So for

example in this slide, we're talking about race, gender, biological sex, and sexual

orientation. If you look right under you are going to see a blue table and that

blue table is going to tell us whether the results are significant and if we

conducted either an F-test or a t-test. As we see here we have a little

orientation to the graphs we have provided. So for example we notice some

of these shapes down here. And what these shapes show is significant differences

between the two. So for example White students have a higher sense of

belonging compared to Black students as seen with the blue square that's provided. And

as we go along further we see the Hispanic students have a higher sense

belonging compared to our Black students as seen by the purple

diamond that's at the bottom. And as we go on for example when referencing the gender we

see that female students have a higher sense of belonging compared to transgender

students as seen with the triangle provided. And also male

students have a higher sense of belonging to JMU's campus compared to

transgender students as seen with the star. Then lastly when looking here

to the far right we're looking at sexual orientation and we see that our

heterosexual students had a better sense of belonging compared to our bisexual

students and other students as seen with the pentagon and the circle provided below.

In this other category there are students that don't identify as homosexual or

bisexual so this can mean that they are pansexual or queer students. When looking at this slide

the group differences we're examining on this slide are class year, residential

status, citizenship status, and language background and as seen in the previous

slide we also have a blue table here that's provided that's gonna mention whether

and an F or t-test was conducted and what the p-value is for that.

As we can see here on the far right we find that native English-speaking

students have a higher sense of belonging to JMU's campus compared to

our bilingual and multilingual students. An example that could be that this is a

university found in the US and it's very predominantly English-speaking campus and

country as a whole so that could lead to reasons as to why they might not feel

like they belong on campus. In this slide we're looking at right now we're looking

at ability status, income level, and athlete status when it comes to sense of

belonging and as we can see here we have another blue table that's going to provide

us the p value and whether an F or t-test was conducted.

When looking at the far left we see that our students with no

disabilities had a higher sense of belonging compared to our students who

have mental health issues as seen with the diamonds provided under. Now when we

look at the middle we're talking about income and when it comes to income

students that are under the $20,000 income marker have a lower sense of

belonging compared to our students that are found between the $80,000 and

$100,000 bracket. So switching gears a little bit we're going to be

talking about perceptions of connectedness. Compared to the other

scale of sense of belonging that refers to one's personal sense of belonging

campus, perceptions of connectedness is how one perceives the campus is connected

and sort of the community that forms with that and to analyze that we used

a six item scale that has an internal reliability of 0.78. That's

fairly high as well and when looking at an example question one of them is "In

general I feel that the campus climate at JMU is communicative."

So in this slide we're looking at in particular when it comes to perceptions

of connectedness when it comes to race, gender, biological sex, and sexual

orientation. As we can see again we have another blue table that talks about the

F and t-test, whether an F or t-test was performed as well as the p-value. One

of the first significant findings we see here when it comes to race is that our

White students had a higher perception of connectedness compared to our Asian/

Pacific Islander students and Black students. Looking at here in the middle

when talking about gender for example we can see that our transgender students

had a lower perception of connectedness compared to our male and female students.

Then when looking at the far right when it comes to sexual orientation we can

see that our heterosexual students had a higher perception of connectedness

compared to our homosexual students, bisexual students, and other students as

well. So in this slide we're going to be talking about class year,

residential status, citizenship status, and language background. Once

again we have a table provided that tells us whether an F or t-test was

conducted and the associated p-value. So when looking at class year we can see

that first years have the higher perception of connectedness. A reason as

to why graduate students might have a lower perception of connectedness could

be because of maybe a lack of student organizational involvement or because

they live off campus and they miss out on the events

that are happening. When looking at language background a reason

as to why bilingual and multilingual students have a person have a lower

perception of connectedness could be that when we look at JMU's campus it's

predominantly English speaking and a lot of people speak English

in and around the campus. The group differences we're going to talk about in this slide are

going to be ability status, income level, and athlete status. When looking down

again we have another blue table that's going to tell us whether an F or t-test

was conducted and the associated p-value with that. Looking at the ability

status we see that no disability students have a higher perception of

connectedness compared to our students that have mental health issues or sensory or

motor disabilities. A lot of that could be maybe they perceive the campus to

have a lack of resources to help students that do have disabilities. So

when looking here we're going to be talking about acceptance of diversity

and this is how students perceive how accepting the campus is in regards to

people of different sexual orientation, ability status, race, income level, etc.

We used a nine item scale had an internal reliability of 0.93 which is fairly high. And

when looking at this slide right here the groups we're looking at are race, gender, biological sex, and sexual

orientation. Once again we have a blue table that's going to tell us the

p-value and then if we did an F or a t-test. When looking at race

in particular we see that White students have a higher perception of accepting of

diversity compared to our Asian and Pacific Islander students. When looking at

gender we see that our transgender students have a lower

perception of acceptance of diversity compared to our male and female students.

And then when looking to the far right when it comes to sexual orientation we

see that our heterosexual students had a higher perceived acceptance of diversity

compared to our homosexual students, bisexual students, and other students.

So when looking at this slide we're looking at class year, residential status,

citizenship status, and language background. Once again you have another

blue table that's provided that tells us whether an F or t-test was performed as

well as the associated p-value. And when looking at class year in particular we

see that the longer that students are at JMU's campus the less accepting

of diversity they see the campus is. In particular we see that our

non-traditional students marked as other perform the lowest on this scale. When

looking at language background we see that our native English speaking

students have a higher perception of accepted diversity compared to our

bilingual and multilingual students on campus. When looking at these group differences

we're looking at ability status, income level, and athlete status. Once again we

have another blue table that's provided that tells us the associated p-value and

whether after an F or t-test was performed. Here, at the far left we're looking at

ability status and you see that our students with no disabilities have a

higher perception of accepted diversity compared to our students

with mental health issues or sensory and motor disabilities. So in section 2.4

we're talking about diversity and inclusivity. That refers to something that is called

structural diversity and that's diversity that you can see on campus whether that

means faculty or students that come from different backgrounds. To find that we

had a 9 item scale that had an internal reliability of .94.

And an example of a question that we asked is, "I think that the JMU student body

is diverse with respect to..." sexual orientation, ability status, etc. So

the group differences we're looking at this slide are race, gender, biological sex, and

sexual orientation. Once again we have another blue table that's provided that's

telling us whether an F or t-test was conducted as well as the associated p-value.

When looking at this graph we can see that there's significant differences

across race, gender, biological sex, and sexual orientation inferring the campus

isn't diverse or inclusive enough. In particular when looking at race, we see that our

White students had a higher perception of diversity and inclusivity compared to

our biracial/multiracial students. When looking at gender we see that our

transgender students scored lower on this scale compared to our male

and female students. When looking at biological sex we see that females

scored lower than men on this scale. Then lastly when talking about sexual

orientation we have two findings to mention. The first finding that we see is a

heterosexual students scored higher than homosexual students and other students.

The second finding we see as well is that our bisexual students scored higher

than other students. When looking at here the group differences we're examining are

class year, residential status, citizenship status, and language background. Once

again we have another table at the bottom that tells us whether an F or t-test

was performed as well as the associated p-value. When looking at class year we see

that the earlier you are in your academic career at JMU the more diverse

and inclusive you perceive the campus to be with first-year students scoring

higher than everyone else and then sophomore students scoring higher than

everyone else except when compared to our first-year students.

The group differences we're examining this slide are ability status, income level, and athlete

status. Once again we have another blue table down there that tells us whether an F or t-test

was performed as well as the associated p-value. When looking at

ability status we see that students that have mental health issues

see the campus as not diverse or inclusive compared to students with

ADHD and learning disabilities or no disability. When looking at student athletes we see that

student athletes perceive the campus to be inclusive and diverse and a reason as to

why that could be is because they come from more diverse backgrounds whether they are

out of state or maybe even international students. So in closing we can see that students

from dominant cultural groups reported a better campus climate than students

from a minority cultural group. This sort of follows societal trends that we

see. Now ways that we can use this data is first as hiring and promoting more

diverse faculty, staff, and students. And this doesn't mean just having faculty of

color this means having faculty from different countries, different religions,

different sexual orientations. And the reason why we should have those

faculty is because they help integrate innovative teachers techniques and

valuing diverse insights which will create a more inclusive climate for JMU. And my

colleague Bri will elaborate more on why students think it's important to have

that diversity in the classroom in a later video. Lastly it's important that there is

more organizational collaboration with greater commitment to social justice such as

having better communication between offices found on JMU's campus.

So we just wanted to say thanks so much for watching our series of videos about the JMU campus

climate. For more information about the climate you can click on any of the

links in our YouTube series or send us an email to

madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

For more infomation >> Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - JMU Campus Climate (Video 3 of 5) - Duration: 11:49.

-------------------------------------------

Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Discrimination at JMU (Video 4 of 5) - Duration: 8:52.

Hi my name is Maya Rivers and I'm a senior Psychology major here at JMU and also a research

assistant as a part of the Cultural and Racial Diversity Studies Lab.

I'll be talking us through section 3 of Madison Matters' campus climate study discussing campus

experiences of discrimination.

For this video we're only going to discuss the qualitative questions that have to do

with campus experiences of discrimination.

However, if you're interested in knowing more about the dataset and all aspects of the study,

please feel free to contact Madison Matters at madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

In the next few slides, I'll be discussing the data from students who witnessed or experienced

discrimination on campus, the reason for discrimination, the type or form of discrimination they experienced,

where it took place, and also the perpetrator.

Question 7 of the study asked the participants to check either yes or no if, during their

time at JMU, they have personally experienced discrimination because of biological sex,

gender expression, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious background, socio-economic

status, race or ethnicity, disability, country of origin, or language background or accent.

You'll notice that the sample size may change from slide to slide, as some participants

did not provide an answer for all items.

Results from this section of the study, though, show that students are most likely to experience

discrimination because of their biological sex.

191 of the 1,435 participants who completed this section of the survey selected "yes"

for the religious background criteria.

11.7% of the participants reported discrimination based on religious background.

9.7% reported discrimination based on socio-economic status, and 12.9% reported discrimination

based on race or ethnicity.

Finally, approximately 6.2% of the population reported that they had experienced discrimination

due to sexual orientation.

About 1 out of 3 participants of our survey reported that they had experienced discrimination

on campus at least once.

You might also notice on the graph that some participants reported experiencing discrimination

based upon gender identity and gender expression.

Although discrimination as a result of the categories is not as large as others, it may

be helpful to know the difference between the two.

Gender identity is the mental and psychological aspect of how individuals identify their gender.

Gender expression, on the other hand, is the manifestation of gender, such as how one acts,

dresses, etc.

Question 8 of the study analyzes cases in which discrimination was witnessed, in comparison

to experienced.

The participants were asked to indicate if they had witnessed discrimination based upon

the same items presented in the previous slide, and also in a yes/no response style.

More than half of our sample reported that they witnessed discrimination at least once

on campus.

Notice that that's a much larger number of participants who witnessed discrimination

than experienced discrimination on campus.

In fact, the total number of reports of incidents of witnessed discrimination was well over

3,000, which is more than 3 times the amount of reports of personal experiences of discrimination,

as I mentioned on the previous slide.

The green bars on the graph represent the sample of those who experienced discrimination

on campus, whereas the blue bars represent the sample of those who witnessed discrimination

on campus.

As you can see, many more of the participants indicated that they witnessed discrimination

on campus as compared to those who reported that they experienced discrimination on campus.

I'm going to talk through the two largest categories that we noticed here, which were

race and ethnicity and sexual orientation.

About 500 of the participants reported that they witnessed discrimination based upon race

and ethnicity on campus, whereas approximately 130 of the participants reported that they

experienced discrimination based on race and ethnicity on campus.

This tells us that there are a lot more cases of discrimination on campus than people are

reporting experiencing.

About 450 of the participants reported that they experienced discrimination on campus

based upon sexual orientation, whereas less than 100 reported that they experienced discrimination

based on sexual orientation.

This tells us that discrimination based on sexual orientation is also underreported as

it is for race and ethnicity.

Question 9 of the survey asked the participants to identify the types of discrimination they

have personally experienced on campus.

The participants were asked to select all that apply from the following: verbal harassment,

online/social media remarks, graffiti, fear or threat of physical violence or assault,

actual physical violence or assault, property damage, harassment due to being in the "wrong"

bathroom or locker room, or fear of negative consequences from disclosing some aspect of

your identity to an instructor, administrator, supervisor, or peer.

33% of the participants reported that they had experienced discrimination in the form

of online/social media remarks, while 22% of the participants of this section of the

study indicated that they have experienced verbal harassment on JMU's campus, while 12.4%

of the participants reported that they experienced discrimination associated with a fear of negative

consequences from disclosing some aspect of their identity to an instructor, administrator,

supervisor, or peer.

This study is similar to other campus climate studies in its nature.

However, in consulting with Madison Equality, a campus-wide organization that focuses on

JMU's LGBTQ+ community, we decided to add two additional microaggressive items.

Those items include the fear of negative consequences and the "wrong" bathroom categories.

Notice even though 12.4% of the reports of discrimination concerned fear of negative

consequences from disclosing some aspect of their identity, that number was larger than

the number of LGBTQ+ participants in the sample.

When we investigated this 12.4%, we found that students were uncomfortable discussing

their religion or disability with an instructor or peer.

There are also 53 reports of fear of being in the "wrong" bathroom or locker room, and

this number included 100% of our transgender sample.

Another thing I'd like to point out is that the total number of reports, which is at about

2,600, is higher than that in question 7.

This could be due to the microaggressions included in this section, and also that some

students perhaps didn't know that cyberbullying was a form of discrimination.

Question 11 of the survey only concerns the participants that did report experiencing discrimination.

The participants were asked to identify areas in which they experienced discrimination on

campus.

They were asked to select all that apply from a provided list of common campus areas.

37.9% of the participants reported that they experienced discrimination in a residence

hall, while 20.7% reported that they experienced discrimination in other areas, which may include

at a party, in off-campus housing, a parking garage, or much more.

Finally, approximately 13.6% of participants experienced discrimination in the classroom.

This information may suggest that students and teachers are often the perpetrators of

discrimination on campus.

Question 12 of the survey asked participants to identify the source of discrimination if

they have ever experienced it on campus.

The participants were asked to select all that apply from a possible list of perpetrators.

The results show that the most common source of discrimination at JMU was other students,

with about 65.5% of the participants reporting that they had experienced discrimination from

their peers.

9.7% of the participants reported that they didn't know, while 9.1% reported the faculty

as a source.

This data falls in line with the findings described in the previous slide.

Overall, this data can be helpful in discrimination prevention techniques through programming,

education, resource building, etc.

As Dr. Lee mentioned in his earlier video, JMU's CFI, or Center for Faculty Innovation,

is a very useful resource for training faculty on issues related to diversity.

However, in addition to faculty, it is important that the JMU community as a whole becomes

more proactive in preventing discrimination on campus.

Please tune in to my colleague Bri's video for a student perspective of what will make

the campus climate a little bit better.

So we just wanted to say thanks so much for watching our series of videos about the JMU

campus climate.

For more information about the climate, you can click on any of the links in our YouTube

series, or send us an email to madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

For more infomation >> Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Discrimination at JMU (Video 4 of 5) - Duration: 8:52.

-------------------------------------------

Mejorar - Loop Vídeo Clip Oficial - Duration: 3:18.

For more infomation >> Mejorar - Loop Vídeo Clip Oficial - Duration: 3:18.

-------------------------------------------

Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Classroom Experiences and Campus Resources - Duration: 10:45.

Hi my name is Brianna Intili. I'm a research assistant from James Madison

University's Cultural and Racial Diversity Studies Lab. I'll be discussing

sections 4 and 5 of the Madison Matters presentation which discusses polls

taken on students' classroom experience and their awareness and use

of campus resources. This is Dr. Lee. He's the director of the Madison Matters

project and he'll be assisting me in this presentation. Section 4

has two subscales, the first of which is called "faculty comfort discussing

diversity" which measures students' perceptions of professors' comfortability

discussing diversity issues such as religion, sexual orientation, race, gender,

etc. It's composed of a 9 item scale which has an internal reliability of

0.96 which is pretty high. The second scale is called Diversity Issues

in the Classroom. This measures students' perceptions of professors' awareness of

these diversity issues and their ability to handle them in the classroom. It is

a 12 item scale with an internal reliability of 0.81 which is

also pretty high. In the next series of slides we will be showing you the results

of each subscale in which the first one that measures faculty's comfort

discussing diversity. We looked for significance between groups of different

race, gender, biological sex, and sexual orientation. Higher scores indicate

positive perception that professors are comfortable discussing various topics.

In the next few slides you will be seeing a small blue box which indicates whether

each group is measured with an F-test or t-test with a p-value in which two

stars will indicate significance. In this slide we notice significance in both

race and sexual orientation. The first measurement to show significance was

race in which Hispanic and Latinx had the highest reports that faculty felt

comfortable discussing diversity compared to Asian and Pacific Islander

and Black and African-American students. White students also rated faculty better

than did Asian/Pacific Islander and Black students. The second and last

area to show significance was sexual orientation in which heterosexual

students perceive faculty as being more comfortable discussing diversity as

opposed to other students which are not homosexual or bisexual such as pansexual,

asexual, or queer. The next slide of the first subscale measures groups of

different class year, residential status, citizenship status, and language

background. Once again higher scores indicate positive perceptions that

professors are comfortable discussing various topics. Again we have this blue

box in which we only indicated a significance for class year in which

non-traditional students felt professors were less comfortable

discussing diversity than did freshmen/first-years, sophomores, and graduate students. The

third slide of the first subscale measures people of different ability

status, income level, and athlete status. If you notice this blue box we found

that nothing was significant which means that none of these groups showed a

significant result in whether or not they thought professors felt more

comfortable discussing diversity issues. The second subscale measures diversity

issues in the classroom which means students' perceptions of professors'

ability to handle diverisity issues in the classroom.

We looked for differences comparing people of different race, gender, biological sex, and

sexual orientation. Higher scores indicate an increased perception that

professors are able to handle the various diversity issues. Once again we

have one of these small blue boxes in which we only found the significance and

biological sex. We found that female students felt that

professors were less able to handle various diversity issues than did male

students. If you notice in the blue box we also have a significant p-value for

the group of gender. However in the post hoc test we did not pick up any

significant result. It looks like however that transgender students were reporting

that professors were less able to handle various diversity issues in the

classroom as compared to male and female students. This next slide of the second

subscale measures diversity issues in the classroom with different people of

class year, residential status, citizenship status, and language background. We also

found a significance as you can see in this little box with class year in which

seniors reported a higher ability of professors to handle diversity issues as

compared to juniors. And first-year students also reported a higher ability

of professors than did sophomores and juniors. This next slide of the second

subscale measures people of different ability status, income level, and

athlete status. We found significance in just the athlete status group in which

student athletes reported a higher ability for professors to handle

diversity issues than did non student athletes. Some of what we know about this

demographic is that they come from more diverse backgrounds which means that

they are more familiar with these concepts and feel faculty are able to

handle diversity issues in the classroom. In the next few slides we are reporting

results from open-ended questions about what we asked in the Madison Matters

survey in sections 4 and 5. This first question asks what the best class you

have taken at JMU educating about diversity issues was. In the table below

we have the top ten classes that students reported. The other students

reported so many classes that if you are interested we invite you to email us for the full report.

Most of these classes were gen ed

classes because the majority of our sample were first year students. The best

class reported SOCI110 in which 9.7 % of

citations reported as the best class. A follow-up question was administered

where we summarized which department each course was in. The department with the

highest number of responses was sociology and anthropology.

Before we move on to section 5 I'd just like to discuss our findings of section 4.1 and 4.2.

Given the results from these sections we can use this data to increase awareness

of student perceptions of faculty and encourage faculty to learn and care more

about more diverse experiences. Section 5 of this survey looks at awareness and

use of campus resources in which we asked three questions. The first of which

is "which of the following campus resources have you heard of?" The second

is "which of the following campus resources have been contacted visited or

used?" The third question asks "what specific university resources do you

think JMU needs more of to improve the campus climate?" This question asks

"which of the following campus resources you have heard of?" in which students

reported the most they knew of was the Counseling Center which was followed by

the Office of Disability Services, the LGBT & Ally Education program, the Dean

of Students Office, the Center for Multicultural Student Services and the

Office of International Programs along with JMU's Women's and Gender Studies Program.

This question asked "which of the

following campus resources have you contacted, visited, or used?" The top

three highest reported answers were the Counseling Center, the Office of

International Programs, and the Office of Disability Services. So one of the surprising things we found about

this data is that it seemed like many students were not aware of programs such

as the Center for Multicultural Student Services, the LGBT and Ally Education

Program, Safe Zone, or JMU Women's and Gender Studies program. What we think

this might mean may be a general lack of awareness of opportunities to learn more

about diversity issues at JMU so maybe what campus can do more of is

to promote this kind of programming so all members of the campus are more

involved in these sorts of events. So the next question we asked in the survey was

"what specific University resources do you think JMU needs more of to improve

the campus climate?" So we analyzed the data from the 545 valid responses and we

found that diversity programming was the most popular response. Many students

indicated the need for more extracurricular activities about

diversity, required diversity classes as part of the gen ed curriculum as well as

expanding the Center for Multicultural Student Services. The second most popular

response from our dataset was improving counseling resources so expanding the

Counseling Center, hiring more staff, and so forth. Third most popular response was

creating greater awareness of resources that exist and that was followed by

resources specifically dedicated to women and gender issues which was

followed by about 5.1% of respondents who indicated a need for

greater LGBTQ+ related resources. If you follow our slide the sixth most

popular response was disability related resources followed by increased racial

diversity on campus and on the right-hand side were some responses that

were related to one another. 12 students said there was a need to improve the

system of reporting discrimination on campus and 11 students said there was a

need for better safety and police training on campus and if you look a

little bit lower 1.5% of students said there was a better need for more

awareness of sexual assault policies as well as greater accountability for those

policies so some of these responses were related to one another.

I should also point out that a large share of the responses were neutral with respect to

this question. About 29% of respondents said that things were

okay or they said "not applicable". And finally 12.5% of responses were

miscellaneous and could not be categorized in any of the other themes

identified by the sample so some of these responses included things like

changing the housing environment, better parking, interfaith resources, or

language help. I also want to point out that about 900 respondents did not even

answer this question which sort of limits some of the generalizability but that

might also tell us that there was a large section of the sample that

actually felt that JMU's resources for campus climate were fine or simply that

people could not identify a resource that could be improved. The data

collected from section 5 shows us that students mostly want increase in

awareness of existing resources or create new resources as well as increase

campus diversity.

So we just wanted to say thanks so much for watching our

series of videos about the JMU campus climate. For more information about the

climate you can click on any of the links in our YouTube series or send us

an email to madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

For more infomation >> Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Classroom Experiences and Campus Resources - Duration: 10:45.

-------------------------------------------

Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - General Well-Being (Video 2 of 5) - Duration: 9:10.

So today we will be looking at section 1 of our campus climate survey called

Madison Matters. Section 1 looks at general well-being. In this section we

use two measures to assess general well-being on campus. The first one is

the mental health inventory otherwise known as MHI and this is a measure which

a higher score indicates a worse off mental health. Questions that we used to

assess that are things such as, "during the past month how much of the time were

you a happy person or have you felt calm and peaceful?"

The second survey measure that we use to assess general well-being is

satisfaction with life. In this case a higher score will represent a higher

satisfaction with life so this is questions like in most ways my life is

close to my ideal or the conditions of my life are excellent. In this specific

slide we will be looking at race, gender, biological sex, and sexual orientation.

This blue box right here will show us significant results. Right here these

asterisks are indicating whether or not those results are significant and

these symbols under the categories like these triangles here they represent when

there's a significant difference between different groups. So for race we did not

find any significant differences in our data on MHI across the different racial

groups. For gender we found significant differences across all three groups

including female, male, and transgender. Transgender have the significantly

highest reported MHI which means that they have a worse off mental health

status. Next up we have female students and the lowest mental health inventory

score is by our male students so male students on campus are reporting

significantly better mental health status than our female and transgender

students. For biological sex we have significant differences between our

female and male students again where male students have a significantly lower

score meaning that they have a better mental health status. And finally for

sexual orientation we are measuring this demographic in four categories including

heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and other and we found significant

differences between heterosexual and other in that heterosexual students have

a lower reported mental health inventory score than our students who identify in

an other status of sexual orientation category so those other students do have

a worse mental health experience. For this next slide we are again looking at

mental health inventory across different demographics.

In this slide we're specifically looking at class year, residential status,

citizenship status, and language background. These results were analyzed in the same

manner our last slides were using analysis of variance for our large

categories of three or more and t-tests for our smaller categories comparing

two groups. In this slide we did not find any significant results meaning

that our mental health status was experienced similarly for students of

all class years, for all residential statuses, for all citizenship statuses,

and for all language backgrounds. For ability status we have a few different

significant findings. Our first one is that students with no disability have a

lower mental health inventory than students that have a disability

identified as mental health issues so students with no disability have a

better mental health status and those with mental health issues. Again for

ability status students that have a mental health issue related ability

status have a higher MHI score than those students with an ADHD or learning

disorder ability status so students again with these mental health issues

have a worse sense of mental health. Income levels we actually did not have

any significant findings on mental health inventory and whether or not a

student was a student athlete did not show any indication of their mental

health inventory as well. So these next few slides we will be looking at the

satisfaction with life measure across the different demographic variables.

These measures were analyzed in the same way our MHI was for larger demographic

variables that have three or more groups we use an analysis of variance F test

and for the ones with just two groups we use t-tests to measure the significance

levels. Again you can look at this blue box right here to see where our

significant findings are and then you can use these symbols under these

categories and see what groups they were between so for this slide we are looking

at race, gender, biological sex, and sexual orientation. We had a significant finding

in the race category. White students had a higher satisfaction with life

score than our Black and African-American students so on average

our white students are experiencing higher satisfaction with their lives.

There were no significant findings for gender or biological sex however you

will notice that while there was not significant finding we have a very much

smaller mean for these transgender students so we may not have had a sample

size large enough to get significance but you can tell there are still

differences across these groups. And finally for sexual orientation we found

again like MHI that our heterosexual students have a higher satisfaction with

life score than our other students do. For this slide will be looking at

satisfaction with life across class year, residential status, citizenship status, and

language background. Our first demographic is class year and we looked

at it in categories of freshman/first-year, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate, and

other. In this other category we have continuing education or non-traditional

students and we found that our other category does have a significantly lower

satisfaction with life than all other categories.

So those four normal class years and graduate students have a higher

satisfaction with life. In our next area we did not find a significant difference

for residential status however we found a significant difference in citizenship

status. You'll see here that naturalized citizens or green card students have a

lower satisfaction with life than our US-born students do. We did not find any

significant differences as far as language background goes.

So for this next slide we'll be looking at satisfaction with life across ability status,

income, and student athletic status. In this first category we found that

students with a mental health condition have a lower satisfaction with life

compared to students that do not have a disability. In our next level we found that

students that are coming from families under $60,000 a year for annual income

so these three categories have a lower satisfaction of life than students who

come from a family with $100,000 or more in annual income. This could be because

these students have to work more hours in order to help pay for their education

instead of joining other student organizations or hanging out with their

friends as their higher socioeconomic peers might. In our last category we

found no significant differences on satisfaction with life or whether or not

a student was a student athlete. We can identify some of our most vulnerable

populations as transgender, female, students with mental health conditions,

Black and African-American students, non-traditional students or continuing

education, naturalized citizen or green card residents, or students from a lower

socioeconomic status. In my colleague Bri's video on section 5 you'll learn

about the resources and students' awareness about those resources at JMU.

So if you are an instructor at JMU watching this video you should be

considering how the students in your classrooms are experiencing their

general well-being and how you can be more accommodating to them and reach out

with resources. If you are a student watching this you should consider how

your peers are and the experiences they have based on their demographics. You

should be able to advocate within student life and your student

organizations for these groups.

So we just wanted to say thanks so much for

watching our series of videos about the JMU campus climate for more information

about the climate you can click on any of the links in our YouTube series or

send us an email to madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

For more infomation >> Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - General Well-Being (Video 2 of 5) - Duration: 9:10.

-------------------------------------------

Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Introduction and Demographics Video 1 of 5 - Duration: 14:35.

Hi everybody, my name is Dr. Matt Lee. I am an associate professor here at James

Madison University and I'm the director of the Madison Matters project, which is

a huge campus climate survey that's now become an advocacy project here at JMU.

So the background of the Madison Matters project is that our project was a joint

collaboration between my research lab in the Department of Psychology which is

the CARDS Lab, the Cultural and Racial Diversity Studies Lab and the LGBTQ

faculty listserv. So a couple of years ago members of the LGBTQ listserv

actually contacted me and my lab and asked us if we were willing to help them

construct a student climate survey and at the time the listserv was interested

in identifying climate experiences of the LGBTQ faculty and staff and because

they were unable to do that they thought that investigating student

experiences of climate would still help them understand more of what was going

on. So the purpose of this series of videos is to discuss our dataset to

help you, our audience, try to make informed decisions about programming,

hiring, and priority setting by trying to get a more thorough understanding of

some of the different demographic backgrounds of our students and

different dimensions of campus climate in which some of our students are either

struggling or are doing well. If at any point you are interested in contacting

us to consult on some of the work that you are doing or you're interested in

learning more about our survey or our results you can contact us at

madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com and we'll also give you some contact information at the

very end of the video. I'd like to thank Art Dean and the JMU Office of Access and Inclusion,

the JMU Department of Psychology, and Paul Mabrey from

Communication Studies for providing us with support as well as funding for

carrying out this project and a huge thanks to all the students and interns

who have worked with us over the years creating some of this content, analyzing

data, and presenting data at a number of different sites thank you very much for

all your help with this project. So this is a photograph of the current

Madison Matters team. We are currently a research and

advocacy project run by the CARDS Lab in the Department of Psychology and so we

collected this data back in 2015 and over the past year and a half we have

been communicating with a number of different offices on campus try to help

them in understanding more of what's going on with the campus climate as well

as provide ideas and brainstorm about what to do about student climate issues.

One of the biggest collaborations that we've conducted this year has been with

JMU's CFI, the Center for Faculty Innovation, in which I partnered with

Emily Gravett and Andreas Broscheid at CFI to create a new institute on

inclusive methods in the classroom. So faculty in this institute are learning a

little bit more about some of the data that we collected in our survey as well

as the demographics of JMU students as well as learning new ideas about how to

create activities and create a positive learning environment for all of our

students. Our main goal right now is to try to promote more dialogue and

advocacy around issues of diversity and inclusion at JMU by using facts by using

data that we have collected and so all of our staff including our Psych and

SMAD undergraduates are trained in data analysis, interpretation, and

communication and many of our students have been involved in meetings and

planning events where we are communicating more about the data that

we have collected. So I'd encourage you to check out our YouTube channel to see

more of the videos that we've done of some of the events that we've created

over the past few years. So what is campus climate? Campus climate refers to

the current attitudes, behaviors, and standards and practices of employees and

students of an institution. So it's looking at what the demographics are as

well as how positively people think of one another and if they're actually

getting involved in friendships and relationships with one another if

students trust their faculty members if students trust the institution and feel

connected to the institution. So the last quantitative measure of campus climate

conducted here was actually done by myself and Dr. Dena Pastor back in 2009

and this was project in which we found many minority

students actually reported worse indicators of campus climate compared to

many majority students and specifically some of those groups that were more

vulnerable or reported higher levels of discrimination

included Black, Asian, non-Christian, disabled, or female

students and those students tend to fare worse compared to White, Christian,

non-disabled, and male students and so one of the reasons that we conducted our

survey in 2015 was to help see if there is any change or if there's something

new that we could identify in the more current dataset. We know that campus

climate correlates with a number of outcomes including psychological

well-being, GPA, mental health, and experiences of discrimination and what

you'll see is you watch through a series of videos is that a lot of the findings

actually mirror some national trends in campus climate and some of the other

research that's been conducted at other universities. So one thing that's

really great about our survey is that we expanded our demographic categories to

try to really understand more of how students identify and how that might

matter in their experiences of campus climate and I would like to point out

again at the time that this research was being conducted and even at the time of

publication of this video, this was the largest campus climate dataset of its

kind ever conducted at JMU. We recruited students through GCOM classes and GPSYC

classes for class credit or students who found out about our survey

through message boards bulk email, TV ads, or flyers in academic buildings or on

the Commons could actually participate and enter their email address into a

raffle to win one of twenty gift cards. So briefly, these are the six sections of

our survey and if you notice here we selected measures that were related to

campus climate or correlated to campus climate in addition to more direct

measures of campus climate, so we include the measures of psychological well-being

as well as experiences of discrimination and classroom experiences in addition to

our general perceptions of campus climate. Our fifth section of

the survey will cover awareness and use of campus resources dedicated to

diversity and multiculturalism and then our final survey will cover the

demographics of our sample and in this video I'll be reviewing the major

demographics from our sample. I'd also like to point out that many of the

sections in this survey repeat the campus climate survey items from 2009

and so if you find a copy of the 2009 climate report you can compare some of

the results from that survey to our current investigation. Okay so I'll

finish this video by just reviewing the demographics of our student sample which

again we had just over 7% of the student body complete the survey and as you

notice here I'll be very thorough in describing the different categories that

students used to self-identify. I do want to point out that although JMU asks

about many of these questions on the application process what Madison Matters

did was expand the number of demographic categories and the number of options

that students had to self-identify. For example, when we investigated race, we

also included Arabic and Middle Eastern as a category and if you investigate our

actual results you will see that JMU is a predominantly White campus and

we have an under-representation of Hispanic/Latinx and Black and African

American students compared to the national averages, however our sample

does look fairly representative to what we do know about JMU student

demographics as published on the JMU website. We also asked about both gender

and biological sex so when we refer to gender it's more the person's

psychological sense of self and when we asked about biology we're asking more

about a person's physical sense of self and so you might notice a difference

here in the results for gender and biological sex. Both of the results show

that we do in fact have a majority female campus which we know from

JMU demographics, but we also had fourteen students who self-identified as

transgender. Now in some of our follow up videos, you will notice that we included

some of these smaller demographic categories for purposes of illustration

and those of you who are really into data would know that some of the sample

sizes are possibly too small to permit for analysis but for purposes of really

illustrating some of the major categories of cultural identities, we did

in fact include transgender in our analyses. For other categories such as

Native-American and intersex we omitted those students from follow-up analyses.

Lastly I want to mention that for sexual orientation students actually had a

checklist and can check more than one option so the majority of our students

self-identified as heterosexual followed by 41 bisexual and you'll see here the

rest of the categories. Now queer refers to students who maybe do not identify as

heterosexual. The term pansexual may refer to students who are attracted to

people regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation and the

term asexual may refer to students who may have no romantic or sexual

attraction to others and so a couple things I'd like to point out about this:

number one, many of these demographic identifiers and the percentages received

are actually very similar to the percentages of people who identify with

these same categories in other campus climate surveys. Secondly

for purposes of data analysis which you'll see in some of our other videos

we included heterosexual students as a category and bisexual students as a

category. We also created the third category for students who are homosexual

so if they wrote homosexual or gay or lesbian we included them as a third

category and then any student who recorded some other sexual orientation

we were able to include as a fourth category which would then allow us to

compare these four groups to one another in follow-up analyses. You'll see that

the majority of our sample were first-year students and we had nine

students who were mostly continuing education students so slightly older

than the rest of the sample. I do simply want to point this out because we did

include follow-up analysis in that we found some differences based

on being a non-traditional student. Based on citizenship status as well as

residency status, we find that most of our students are both US born or Virginia

residents and then finally we asked about native language which is also a

new category for JMU to consider. The grand majority of our sample

self-identified as being English native language speakers with about less than

10% self identifying as being bilingual or multilingual. Our last demographic

slide reveals that the grand majority of our students identified as Christian

although almost 400 identified as non-religious. Now I would like to point

out in some of the talks we've been giving at other audiences some people

are surprised but we know that developmentally many college students

are at the age where they are beginning to question whether or not they want to

pursue the same religious identity or background as the one they may have been

exposed to by their parents or caregivers while growing up, so

this number is actually fairly normal compared to other campus climate surveys.

We also asked about ability status which refers to the presence or absence of a

psychological or physical disability and although we found that the majority of

our students reported having no disability about one out of every seven

students reported having some sort of mental health disorder which may have

included something like depression or anxiety. 92 students identified with ADHD

or a learning disorder and 21 students recorded a sensory or motor disability

and so by breaking up this question into other categories we do have a much

better understanding about some of the general categories that students use for

their ability status. Now in this slide you'll also see the parental income and

you might well notice that the JMU student body and and our sample in fact

tend to come from fairly well-to-do backgrounds. Almost a third of our sample

comes from that highest income bracket in the United States with households of

making $100,000 or greater. The middle class which would probably be our fourth

category of income between $40,000 and $60,000 is a much smaller sample size

in our sample with only about one out of every seven

students coming from the actual middle class and even fewer students than

that coming from lower income brackets. Finally I would just like to mention

that we included athlete status as part of our general investigation of campus

climate and it does in fact become relevant even though a very small number

of students self-identify as athletes. You'll see in some of the other videos that

we have about our survey that being an athlete actually may contribute to

different experiences of the campus climate. So just in conclusion of my

video, one thing to be thinking about in terms of using this data is, how

demographically representative is your programming? Is your department? Are the

students that are taking classes in your major? And secondly what are some

demographic questions that you should be asking that maybe aren't currently being

asked by your department or by the university? So one thing we're really

hopeful that happens from you watching our videos and hearing about

our climate research is that you can do something useful with this information

to ask better questions, ask more questions, and really tailor your

programming or your curriculum or your services to meet the needs of a student

body whose demographics are rapidly changing. So we just wanted to say thanks

so much for watching our series of videos about the JMU campus climate. For

more information about the climate you can click on any of the links in our

YouTube series or send us an email to madisonmattersjmu@gmail.com.

For more infomation >> Madison Matters Campus Climate Survey Series - Introduction and Demographics Video 1 of 5 - Duration: 14:35.

-------------------------------------------

*new*GLEEFULGAMER JUST GOT OWNED l OFFICIAL DISS TRACK (audio only) (turn on cc) - Duration: 3:51.

Time to get at this child throwing tantrums its gross

Roasting Gleeful so bad he's gonna look like burnt toast

You can't even win a game of Fortnite

Because of that you cry yourself to sleep every night

The road to fame and success thats my path

Looking at you you can't even do basic math

Smoking popsicle that's one of your videos

Smoking's really bad weren't you ever told

Considering the way you act your probably 5 years old

On my youtube channel I may have taken a break

But you got the IQ of a moldy cornflake

You don't even upload that'll get you powned

Oh man GleefulGamer just got owned

I got more subscribers than you count them out

You'll never be as good as me no doubt

I'm better than you better pick up the pace

I've been in this for 3 years man I'm putting up a chase

Your channels pretty dead that could be a problem

My hands are cleaner than your whole ugly closet

Man GleefulGamer just got owned

Who is the kid who broke his wii u

Oh yeah that's Gleeful who's you

I remember when you stole my channel from me

It made you feel good wow your a desperate little piggy

Yeah we're all chasing dreams unlike you I'm not asleep

You're laying in your bed counting fluffy little sheep

You once was a good friend on my channel

Now look at you you're a lying animal

Oh man GleefulGamer just got owned

GleefulGamer you aint nothing to me

Cause you just keep adding to my winning streak

Hanna and Clumsy will be on my side for this

30 years old that's the age you'll get your first kiss

I bet your favorite toys are barbie and friends

Your youtube career has reached a dead end

By this time in the song you've been roasted to ash

Meanwhile I'm swimming in cash

GleefulGamer77 just got owned

GleefulGamer you just got owned

Don't try and stop me or get in my way

Or else I'm gonna have to make you pay

Hanna used to be your little crush

When you were around her she'd make you blush

When you moved out the love went away

*epic climax*

Now she always thinks he's gone oh yay

You try and roast me in my own comment section

But the jokes on you you're just wanting attention

If someone ever made a meme about you

It'd die pretty quickly casue you're coo coo

GleefulGamer don't try and hide this you know these roasts are true

I don't want to hear your point of view

GleefulGamer you just got owned

I may have reupload my own diss track

But for all the things you've done to me this is payback

I got a new friend his name is GRIZZLY

The way you act to me Its really silly

Everytime you lose you rage quit

You throw a tantrum and a really massive fit

GleefulGamer you just got owned

GleefulGamer you just got owned

Produced and sung by GameWizard

Song by DJ Ray

For more infomation >> *new*GLEEFULGAMER JUST GOT OWNED l OFFICIAL DISS TRACK (audio only) (turn on cc) - Duration: 3:51.

-------------------------------------------

Simplify Networking in a Hybr...

For more infomation >> Simplify Networking in a Hybr...

-------------------------------------------

One Lane Tunnel to Love's Travel Stop, Benson, Arizona from Dragoon on I-10 West GP072352 - Duration: 26:05.

Interstate 10 West, Dragoon, Arizona, 11 August 2016

Exit 318, Dragoon Rd, Red Jeep

Slower Traffic Keep Right

Slower Traffic Keep Right

Crossover

GP

Wyoming's Silver Subaru

Crossover

Budget Truck trailers U-Haul

Crossover

Sibyl Rd

Bridge

SAIA

Exit 312, Sibyl Rd, Benson, Arizona

Landstar

The Thing?

The Thing, Exit 322

Crossover

CRUM

CRST

The Thing?

C.R. England

FedEx

The Thing?

FedEx

Indian Express, Moreno Valley, CA

The Thing?

Train

UPS

Crossover

Electrical Substation

Swift

White Ford F-150

John Chistner Trucking

US Border Patrol Truck

The Thing?

The Thing?

Crossover

Speed Limit 45

Parkway

Car Carrier

Crossover

Pomerene Rd

Bridge 31.966536, -110.273420

Pomerene Rd

Speed Limit 75

Watch for Water on Road

Crossover, Exit 306

GTX

XTRA

Porta Potty

Bridge over Creek

Penske

Crossover

Black Nissan Altima 3.5 SR

Blue Hyundai

Penske

Chevron Exit

E

Yucca Plant

Ocotillo Ave

Bridge

Texaco

FedEx

The Thing?

The Thng? Exit 322

XTRA

The Thing?

Crossover

Exit 304, Ocotillo Ave, 1/2 Mile

Bridge over Railroad Track

Cooper

4th St

Bridge

4th St

Transport America

Swift

Celadon https://celadontrucking.com/

Crossover

Slower Traffic Keep Right

MVT, Mesilla Valley Transportation

I'm alive

Love's Travel Stop

McDonald's, 618 S State Hwy 90, Benson, AZ 85602 mcdonalds.com (520) 586-7337

State Route 90

State Route 90

Comfort Inn, 630 S Village Loop, Benson, AZ 85602 choicehotels.com (520) 586-8800

Crossover

Exit 303, Tombstone, Douglas, 1 1/2 Mile, Business 10, AZ-80

Exit 302, AZ-90 East, Ft Huachuca, Sierra Vista

Car Carrier

Crossover

No Median Barrier, Next 30 Miles

W

Benson, Next 4 Exits

FedEx

Crossover

FedEx

E

Tank

Steal Tank Cobble Job

Fed Ex

Exit 302, Motel 6

SE, Shippers Express

Exit 299

One Lane Tunnel, Sound Horn, 14ft 2in

One Lane Tunnel, Sound Horn

JAG

SAIA

White Buick

Crossover

Brown UPS Worldwide Services Vehicle, 1-800 Pick UPs www.ups.com

CAT

Copper Star Transportation LLC

520-312-0411

Cell Tower

US Flag

Crossover

White Toyota Tundra, V8

White Saturn

Grey Chrysler Van, Gentle Care Transport Inc.

Grey Car

White Chevrolet Car

White Car

Exit 302

Silver Honda

amazon Prime

Love's, Subway, Chesters

H3 Hummer

Gas Pump

Swift

ups

Love's Tanker

Propane Tanker

Tanker

1st

Cox

Girl in Long Black & White Stripped Dress

No comments:

Post a Comment