Wednesday, January 22, 2014

조기전형-재정보조 신청

보통11월 1일이 마감일인 조기 전형(Early Admission)을 준비하고 있다면 학비 재정보조 신청에 대해서도 반드시 신경을 써야한다. 지원하려고 하는 학교의 웹사이트를 모두 방문해 보고 재정보조에 대해 자세히 알아보는 것이 필요하다. 사립학교의 경우 CSS 프로파일을 제출하라고 하는 학교가 있을 것이고 제출 마감일은 학교에 따라 다르기 때문이다. 조기 전형의 경우 대부분 11월 1일 또는 11월 15일까지 제출해 주어야 하지만 대학에 따라서는 조금 다를 수 있다. 이와 더불어 지원하는 대학 중에 학교 고유의 재정보조 신청 양식을 요구하는 학교는 없는 지 꼼꼼히 살펴보고 있다면 마감일 내로 제출할 필요가 있다.



사립학교의 경우 보통12월 15일까지는 조기 전형의 합격자 발표와 더불어 합격한 대학들로부터 예상치이기는 하지만 학비 재정 보조 내역서(Financial Aid Award Letter)를 받게 된다. 이 내역서를 통해 학생별로 받게되는 재정 보조 내용을 확인할 수 있다. 얼리 디시전에 합격한 경우는 보다 신중히 이를 검토해 볼 필요가 있다. 재정보조 신청 절차가 이것으로 끝난 것이 아니고 예상치의 재정보조 내역서를 통보받았다고 하더라도 1월1일부터 신청이 가능한 FAFSA를 신청해 주는 것이 중요하다. FAFSA 신청 시기도 대학에 따라 Priority 신청 날짜가 다 있으니 이에 늦지 않도록 해야한다.

이외에 대학에 따라서 요구할 수도 있는 서류들, 예를들어 Business & Farm Form, Non-Custodial Form, Verification Form, Non Tax Filer Statement Form 등을 각 대학의 Financial Office로 보내주어야 한다. 또한 주의할 것은 칼리지 보드의 IDOC 서비스를 이용하는 대학들은 이러한 서류들을 대학의 Financial Office가 아닌 IDOC으로 직접 보내주어야 한다는 것이다. 이렇게 하지 않을 경우 서류를 분실할 수도 있으니 IDOC 서비스 여부를 꼭 확인하도록 하자.

보통 CSS프로파일을 제출하게 되면 학생이 신청한 대학들 중 IDOC에 가입되어 있는 대학들의 List를 자동으로 알려주며 학생 고유의 IDOC 번호와 함께 제출해 주어야 할 서류들을 알려준다. 이 중 대표적인 서류가 부모의 2013년 세금보고서의 주요 내용과 세금 보고서 상에 첨부되는 스케줄들이다. 이렇게 대학이 요구하는 모든 서류를 대학에 보내주게 되면 대학은 모든 서류를 검토하고 CSS프로파일에 예상치로 작성한 2013년 세금보고 내용을 다시 한번 비교 검토해 최종적인 재정보조 내역서를 학생들에게 보내준다.

조기 전형에 있어서 특히 얼리 디시전(Early Decision), 즉 지원해서 합격하게 되면 반드시 그 학교에 등록 하는 것으로 약속을 하고 지원을 하는 조기 전형 형태인 얼리 디시전의 경우 재정보조와는 어떤 관계가 있는 지 궁금해 하시는 분들이 많이 있다. 좀 더 구체적으로, 얼리 디시전에 합격해서 재정보조 패키지를 받았는데 너무 조금 보조를 받게 되는 경우 그 학교에 등록을 하자니 재정 형편이 그것을 허락치 않고, 또 재정 형편상 등록을 하지 말자니 꼭 해야하는 계약을 파기하게 되는데 어찌해야 하는지 궁금해 하시는 분들이 있다.

통계적으로 보면 대학 한 곳에 합격한 학생이 일반 전형(Regular Admission)에서 여러 대학에 합격한 학생보다 학비 재정 보조를 적게 받는 것으로 나와 있긴 하다. 그리고 문제는 얼리 디시전의 계약을 빌미로 재정보조를 더 조금 주면 어떻하냐는 학생 가족의 불안감이다. 그러나 명심할 것은 얼리 디시전이라 하여 무조건 재정보조가 불리하게 적용된다는 생각은 잘 못 된 것이다.

만약 얼리 디시전에 합격한 경우라도 재정보조가 너무 적어서 부모가 부담할 수 없는 경우라면 취할 수 있는 몇 가지 방법이 있다. 우선은 대학 당국에 이의제기를 통해 재정 보조 받는 액수가 어떻든 필요를 다 채울 수 없는 형편인 것을 어필하고 충분한 증거 자료를 제시해야 한다. 그렇게 되면 학교에서는 학생의 필요를 채워주기 위해 재정 보조액을 늘려 주거나 아니면 어필 한 것을 받아들일 수 없다고 거절할 수도 있다. 후자의 경우, 즉 학교에서 제시한 최종적인 재정 보조에도 불구하고 부족한 재정보조를 근거로 얼리 디시전 계약을 파기할 수 있다. 부족한 재정 보조만이 얼리 디시젼 계약을 파기할 수 있는 유일한 이유가 될 수 있다.

그러나 정말 재정 형편이 문제가 된다면 조기 전형으로 신청하지 말고 정기 지원 때 여러 학교를 지원해서 재정보조 패키지를 비교해서 가장 유리한 학교로 등록하라는 조언을 드리고 싶다. 조기 전형이든 일반 전형이든 Need Base의 학비 재정보조는 부모와 학생의 수입과 재정 상태에 따라 결정이 되므로 앞에서 설명한 시기별 재정 보조 신청을 정확히 그리고 늦지 않게 해주는 것이 무엇보다 중요하다. [미주중앙] Top Edupia 학자금 이야기 45



 

고교 주니어 때 중요한 것은?

■고교 주니어 때 중요한 것은?
지원대학 웹사이트 수시로 투어 정보수집, 여름방학 기간 지명도 높은 프로그램 참가AP
 
대학은 지원자의 고교 시절 퍼포먼스를 평가하여 합격 혹은 불합격을 결정한다. 대입 지원 때 특히 고교 11학년은 그 중 가장 중요한 학년이라고 말할 수 있겠다. 대입 지원서는 12학년 첫 학기에 제출해야 하기 때문이다. 특히 조기지원을 위해서는 11월 초나 11월 중순에 제출해야 하기 때문에 지원서에 기록하는 고교 마지막 학년의 성적이라고 볼 수 있다. 12학년 성적은 아직 나오지 않은 상태이기 때문에 11학년 때 택한 과목과 성적은 대학 입학에 결정적인 역할을 할 수 있다. UC계열 대학 역시 대입지원서 마감이 11월 말이기 때문에 11학년의 성적은 당연히 중요하다. 자! 그렇다면 11학년에는 어떤 것들을 놓치지 않고 준비해야 하는지에 대해서 살펴보자.


1. 무엇보다 중요한 것은 11학년 때 택하는 과목이다
자격이 된다면 가급적 AP나 Honors 과목을 택하도록 한다. 대학 측에서는 입학 원서에 이러한 AP나 Honors 과목이 많이 있을수록 좋게 본다. 우수한 학생들의 경우 AP 과목 등 고교 내신성적을 올리는데 도움이 되는 과목들을 3과목 이상 택하고 있다.

자신의 능력을 먼저 살펴보고 다룰 수 있는 정도의 과목을 택해야 한다. 많은 학생들이 무턱 대고 너무 많은 고급 과목을 선택하여 지금쯤 성적을 올리지 못해 허덕이고 있는 경우도 많다. 일반적으로 너무 많은 AP 과목을 택하여 B를 많이 받는 것보다 능력껏 고급 과목을 수강하며 올 A를 받는 것이 좋다. 물론 많은 AP를 택하여 모두 A를 받는 것이 가장 좋겠지만 말이다.

학기말 시험의 비중이 크기 때문에 혹시 지금 이 시점에서 좋은 성적을 올리지 못하고 있다면 학기말 시험을 대비하여 좀 더 많은 시간을 할애하여 공부계획을 세우도록 하자.

2. PSAT 테스트를 치르도록 하라
이미 PSAT 테스트를 모두 치렀을 것이다. 매년 10월 중순이면 치르기 때문에 11학년에 올라가면서 시험을 치기 위해 등록을 하는 것이다.

필자가 아는 분의 자녀가 11학년인 것을 알기 때문에 혹시 자녀가 PSAT 시험을 잘 쳤느냐고 물었다. 그랬더니 그분은 그 시험을 꼭 봐야 하는 것이냐며 오히려 반문을 하는 것이었다. 알고 보니 UC는 PSAT 시험성적을 요구하지 않고 또 이 시험을 친구들이 안 치니까 자기도 안 쳤다고 하더라는 것이다. PSAT(Preliminary Scholastic AssessmentTest)는 SAT와 달라서 꼭 칠 필요는 없다. 그러나 이 시험에서 성적이 좋으면 연방정부 특혜 장학금(National Merit Scholarship)을 탈 자격이 생긴다.

이 PSAT 시험이 SAT 시험의 척도가 되므로 어느 부분이 부족한지 미리 알 수 있어 실제 SAT 시험을 위해 대비할 수 있다.

또 이 시험을 치름으로써 제한된 시간에 시험장에서 치르는 경험을 쌓아 실전에서의 분위기를 익힐 수도 있을 것이다.

PSAT 성적이 우수한 경우, 많은 명문 사립대학들로부터 자기 대학에 지망하라고 권유하는 안내서가 온다. 또한 시험 치를 때 예를 들어 Telluride Association Summer Program에 흥미가 있다고 표시하면 시험성적이 우수한 학생들에게는 해당 여름방학 프로그램에 지망할 것을 권유해 올 것이다. 아직 시험문제 유형에 대한 정보가 없다면 PSAT나 SAT가 어떤 시험인지 서점에서 책을 사다가 미리 봐둘 것을 권하고 싶다.

12월이 되면 PSAT 결과가 발표된다. 자신이 다니는 고교로 성적이 가기 때문에 시험결과는 학교에서 겨울방학 전에 학생들에게 직접 주게 된다.

만약 자신의 성적이 주 상위 1% 안에 들게 되면 내셔널 메릿 준결승에 올라가게 된다. 각 주마다 컷오프가 다르기 때문에 자신이 살고 있는 지역의 점수를 알아보자.

3. 표준고사를 치를 것
자녀가 원하는 대학이 SAT 성적을 요구하는지 혹은 ACT 성적을 요구하는지 알아보고 어느 정도의 시험성적을 받아야 할지에 대한 계획을 먼저 세워두자. 또한 지원 대학이 SAT 서브젝트 테스트를 요구하는지도 알아보고 준비해야 할 것이다. 일부 대학은 전공에 따라 특정과목의 점수를 요구하기도 한다.

SAT 시험은 collegeboard.com에서 ID와 패스워드를 만들어 시험접수를 해야 하고, ACT는 actstudents.org에서 접수해야 한다.

SAT 시험을 치른 후 자신이 틀린 문제를 리뷰하고 싶다면 시험 접수 때 혹은 시험 치른 후에라도 칼리지 보드에서 question & answer service를 추가비용을 지불하고 신청하면 된다.

또한 대학에 따라 ACT 시험의 경우 반드시 writing 테스트를 추가로 신청해서 본 시험 점수만을 인정하기도 하니 이 점 각별히 살피도록 하라. 많은 주니어들이 겨울 방학동안 집중적으로 공부하여 1월 테스트를 준비하고 있다.

보통 시험결과는 2~3주 후에 온라인으로 볼 수 있다. 온라인뿐 아니라 집으로 시험 결과가 오게 할 수 있기 때문에 성적은 여름 방학 프로그램 등에 지원할 때 요긴하다.

4. 대학 탐방
지원할 대학들의 리스트를 먼저 만들어 대학 탐방을 시도하라. 요즘은 각 대학 웹사이트에 virtual tour를 할 수 있도록 만들어져 있어 시간이 허락하는 대로 지원하고자 하는 대학의 정보를 살펴보자.

대학 탐방은 너무 어린 나이에 할 경우 크게 와 닿지가 않아 돈만 낭비하는 경우도 있다. 개인마다 다른 성숙도가 있어 대학에 대한 어느 정도의 이해가 있기 시작하는 시기가 되었다면 대학 탐방을 시작하는 것이 좋겠다.

이미 SAT 성적이 어느 정도 가늠이 된다면 카운슬러와 함께 목표 대학부터 안정권의 대학까지 자신의 전공에 맞추어 리스트를 만들어보자.

5. 여름방학 프로그램을 찾아 보자
겨울 방학이 다가오면 내년 여름방학 프로그램을 서치해야 한다. 지명도가 있는 프로그램들 즉, RSI, TASP, Ross, PROMYS, Clark 등은 일찍 마감이 되기 때문에 에세이 준비를 비롯해서 서둘러 준비를 해야 한다. 무엇을 전공할 것인지 자신의 성향에 따른 분별력을 가지고 자신이 무엇을 정말 하고 싶어 하고, 잘 할 수 있을 것인지를 먼저 찾아낸 다음 전공을 연결시키도록 하라.

여름방학에 경쟁력 있는 프로그램은 추천서도 써야 하기 때문에 추천서를 써 줄 선생님도 미리 정해 보자. 그리고 자신이 지원할 프로그램의 링크를 알려줘야 할 것이다. 스칼라십에 관한 지원서 작성도 주니어 때 시작하자. 스칼라십 역시 추천서를 요구하는 경우가 많으므로 학교 선생님들과는 각별하게 지내는 것을 권고한다.

여름방학 프로그램이 비용이 만만치가 않아 서포트하기가 어렵다면 스칼라십을 신청해야 하기 때문이다. 스칼라십 신청 때 세금보고를 제출해야 하므로 부모와 의논해서 준비를 해놓아야 한다.

6. AP 및 SAT II 테스트 준비
보통 1월에는 AP 테스트 준비를 시작한다. 늦어도 3월 초부터는 AP 테스트 준비와 더불어 SAT II 테스트 준비를 하자. 주니어 때 택한 AP과목은 가능하면 모두 치를 준비를 하고 같은 과목의 SAT 서브젝트 테스트를 준비하면 좋겠다. 5월과 6월에 있을 SAT 서브젝트 테스트를 신청하고, 5월에 있을 AP 준비를 같이 한다면 일거양득이 된다.

11학년은 대학 진학을 위해 가장 중요하다고 거듭 강조한다. 따라서 최선을 다하여 11학년 때의 성적과 등수를 올려야 한다. 11학년이 되기 전 이 모든 사항을 알고 준비하자. 대학 입학 서류준비 역시 곧 시작해야 하는 시점이다.

Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan

Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan

The Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan is a financial aid program intended to expand access to UC for lower-income students.
UC's Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan will ensure that you will not have to pay UC’s systemwide tuition and fees out of your own pocket if you are a California resident whose total family income is less than $80,000 a year and you qualify for financial aid — and that's just for starters.
Blue and Gold students with sufficient financial need can qualify for even more grant aid to help reduce the cost of attending.
Type of aid: Gift aid (from multiple sources)
How to apply: FAFSA/California Dream Act Application + Cal Grant GPA Verification Form (you will be automatically considered when you submit these forms; there is no separate application for this program)

What's covered

If you are eligible, your systemwide tuition and fees will be fully covered by scholarship or grant money. The plan combines all sources of scholarship and grant awards you receive (federal, state, UC and private) to go toward covering your tuition and fees.
Students with greater financial need can qualify for even more grant support to help defray other educational expenses (like books, housing, transportation, etc.).
You don't need to fill out a separate application to qualify for the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan. You will receive the benefits of the Blue and Gold plan automatically if you qualify.

Eligibility requirements

  • Demonstrate total family income below $80,000 and financial need, as determined for federal need-based aid programs
  • Be in your first four years as a UC undergraduate (first two for transfer students)
  • Meet other campus basic requirements for UC grant aid (for example, be enrolled at least half-time during the academic year, meet campus academic progress standards, not be in default on student loans, etc.)

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

U.S. Offers Russia High-Tech Aid to Thwart Sochi Terror

BRUSSELS — The United States and Russia have opened discussions about using sophisticated American electronic equipment, developed by the Pentagon to counter improvised explosive devices in Afghanistan and Iraq, in a new effort to help secure the Winter Olympic Games in Sochi next month.
The potential for a technological exchange was part of an extensive discussion here Tuesday when Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, held his first face-to-face meeting with his Russian counterpart, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, chief of the general staff.
The Defense Department would be willing to provide equipment designed to detect and disrupt cellphone or radio signals used by militants to detonate improvised explosives from a distance, General Dempsey said. But he cautioned that technical experts from both nations first needed to make sure that the American systems could be integrated into the communications networks and security systems being set in place by Russia.
In discussing the Pentagon’s technology to counter improvised explosives, General Dempsey noted that this was “something that we’ve become extraordinarily familiar with.” Homemade bombs planted by militants have been the leading cause of deaths and injuries to American service members in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But especially during the early implementation of the technology, the American military found it had created a muddle of electronic signals in which competing and overlapping systems canceled out the effectiveness of other systems in use at the same time and in the same area.
“If you’re not careful, you can actually degrade capability, not enhance it,” General Dempsey said.
The discussion between Generals Dempsey and Gerasimov came one day after Pentagon officials disclosed that the United States European Command was drawing up plans to have two Navy warships in the Black Sea at the time of the Sochi games, should they be needed in case of emergency. The games begin Feb. 7.
During their meetings here, the American and Russian military chiefs sought to advance an agenda of exchanges and continued cooperation on counterterrorism and antipiracy operations even as diplomatic relations between Washington and Moscow swing between caustic disagreement and cautious cooperation.
Both the American and Russian generals share a history of having commanded large tank and armored units — and both stressed the importance of improving communication between their armed forces.
“I think we have an opportunity to advance the relationship on areas of common interest,” General Dempsey said.
General Dempsey said his Russian counterpart was deeply concerned about the potential for further instability in Afghanistan after the NATO combat mission there officially ends this year. General Gerasimov has asked for updates on the American and NATO effort to train, advise and equip Afghan National Security Forces, General Dempsey said, as well as Afghanistan’s ability to maintain and control transportation lines in and out of the country.
“He is absolutely concerned, as I would be in his place,” General Dempsey said.

In brief remarks welcoming General Dempsey to the Russian mission to NATO in suburban Brussels, General Gerasimov endorsed “regular contacts” between the militaries as “quite useful.” He noted that the two generals were set to approve a “plan of contact” to strengthen military relations between the two countries; the plan calls for more than 60 exchanges and joint exercises.
This first meeting between the American and Russian military chiefs came against a strained political backdrop. Moscow’s decision to shelter Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, prompted President Obama to call off a one-on-one meeting he had scheduled with President Vladimir V. Putin while in Russia last year. And American efforts to build a missile-defense architecture to protect the territory of NATO allies in Europe continue to provoke protests from Russia.
General Dempsey, in an interview, said it was important for the two militaries “not to foreclose on conversations, even if at some points there are disagreements that prevent the forward movement” in other parts of the relationship, whether political or diplomatic.

How to Compensate Victims of Terrorism

After each national tragedy, the American people ask: How can we help? But the answer changes each time. After the terrorist attacks in 2001, Congress set up a taxpayer-financed fund to compensate victims and their families – and to prevent lawsuits against the airlines. After the Newtown shootings in 2012, nonprofit groups distributed (or did not distribute) donations. After the Boston Marathon bombing last year, a single fund collected contributions, and its administrator decided how to divide them up.
Should the U.S. government compensate victims of mass violence like bombings and shooting sprees? Or should compensation come from other sources, like lawsuits and private donations?

The September 11 compensation fund was rushed into place to address only the victims of that day’s horrific attacks. We learned from that ad hoc process. Now that we are no longer in crisis mode but have the time for more deliberative decision-making, Congress should establish a permanent compensation fund to address victims of future terrorism.

The aftermath of an attack is a vulnerable time, as terrorists intend. But a consistent, established response would expedite the return to normalcy.
A permanent fund is a far more efficient and equitable way to address a problem that is expected to continue. Having a system in place to award and administer funds rather than reinventing a system after each attack should save a significant amount of resources and time. Further, the amount of individual awards and the choice of industries singled out for special protection from lawsuits would seem less arbitrary, more even-handed and more acceptable. A permanent fund would help depoliticize a government relief system that could easily be driven by politics. Kenneth Feinberg has been fair and equitable in overseeing victim compensation after 9/11, but we cannot assume such a brilliant mediator will be available each time. We need a system that does not rely on the discretion of an individual decision-maker. By providing clear guidelines and standards, a permanent fund would create a sense of fairness.

There would also be a significant psychological effect of having a permanent system. As terrorists clearly intend, these attacks heighten our sense of vulnerability. A permanent system would tend to the affected parties immediately, which would help alleviate this sense of vulnerability as citizens look to the government for support and order. It would expedite the return to normalcy. It would be understood as an official response to those who commit terrorism and signal the resolve of the United States that it will not allow its citizens to be permanently injured by such acts.

Neither compensation through the tort system nor government safety-net programs and charities bring these benefits. The tort system is no answer because – apart from its slow pace and technical limitations on recovery – the primary perpetrators of terrorism can rarely be hauled into court. And charitable solutions or safety-net programs might allow for victims to subsist but are unlikely to significantly repair individual loss.

For these very reasons, Britain, Israel and other countries have created permanent compensation systems for victims of terrorism, and American lawmakers have done so in other contexts. We can build on that experience to enact a balanced and fair fund for future victims of terrorism.

Pre-K on the Starting Blocks

Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to offer full-day preschool to every New York City 4-year-old hasn’t yet rounded the corner from election slogan to classroom reality. But it’s moving: a public-relations campaign on Friday started blitzing the city with leaflets and emails to drum up support for the tax to pay for it.
The mayor has assembled early-education experts to design the program and has been seeking support from legislators. He’s even won a (backhanded) endorsement from Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who said in his State of the State address that he wants universal preschool for the entire state. While Mr. Cuomo seems content with an applause line in a wish list, Mr. de Blasio is on the hook with a deeper commitment. He has said how he will pay for it, how much it will cost and that it will begin late this year.
Leaving aside the financing uncertainties, the mayor is on solid pedagogical ground. Full-day prekindergarten is a smart investment in growing minds, preparing children to be skilled learners at a moment when they are primed for it. It’s better to reach them at age 4 rather than fixing their learning problems later. Across the country, lawmakers and educators have embraced the universal preschool movement. President Obama has made a similar case. Mr. de Blasio is making a mainstream argument, though on a bigger scale than anyone else.
The city has about 100,000 4-year-olds. Mr. de Blasio wants to reach 68,000 of them: 48,000 new students on top of the 20,000 who have full-day public preschool now. Children in private programs would be able to attend the city’s free classes if they wish. This will be expensive: $340 million a year, plus $190 million for the after-school program. But if the plan is executed halfheartedly, as an underfinanced form of babysitting, it’s not worth doing. (This is why Mr. de Blasio argues for a dedicated tax, saying yearly appropriations battles would leave too much uncertainty about financing, discouraging a full commitment from teachers and staff needed to make the program work.)

One challenge will be finding the physical space to teach all these 4-year-olds, either by expanding existing programs or building new ones. This may require Mr. de Blasio to put aside his antipathy to charter schools, many of which would be well-positioned to add preschools, though state law would have to be changed to allow this.
Then the city will have to persuade parents to sign up, make sure there is a qualified teaching corps with classes small enough to be effective, and tightly integrate the program with kindergarten through third grade so that 4-year-olds do not lose their momentum. It will have to prepare children well for the rigorous Common Core learning standards that promise to bring their math, science and literacy skills up to international norms.
The key, Mr. de Blasio’s aides say, is creating a meaningful, high-quality learning experience as they build to scale. Skeptics may say that the benefits of preschool tend not to last, but that doesn’t have to be true, if done right and sustained by good schooling in later years.

Sochi forces hunt for 3 potential suicide bombers

SOCHI, Russia — Russian security officials are hunting down three potential female suicide bombers, one of whom is believed to be in Sochi, where the Winter Olympics will begin next month.
Police leaflets seen by an Associated Press reporter at a central Sochi hotel on Tuesday contain warnings about three potential suicide bombers. A police letter said that one of them, Ruzanna Ibragimova, a 22-year-old widow of an Islamic militant, was at large in Sochi.

(Natalya Vasilyeva/ Associated Press ) - A photo of a police leaflet shows Ruzanna Ibragimova and states that she is at large in the city of Sochi. Russian security officials are hunting down three potential female suicide bombers, one of whom is believed to be in Sochi, where the Winter Olympics will begin next month. Police leaflets seen by an Associated Press reporter at a central Sochi hotel on Tuesday contain warnings about three potential suicide bombers.
Video
                
An Islamic militant group in Russia's North Caucasus claimed responsibility for twin suicide bombings in the southern city of Volgograd last month and posted a video threatening to strike the 2014 Winter Olympics.
A U.S. congressman who was in Sochi on Tuesday to assess the situation said he was impressed by the work of Russian security forces but troubled that potential suicide bombers had gotten into the city, despite all of the extraordinary security measures.
“We know some of them got through the perimeter,” Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee, told The Associated Press. “She’s for real. What we don’t know is how many more black widows are out there.”
Russian authorities have blamed the so-called “black widows” of slain insurgents for previous suicide attacks in the country.
The Black Sea resort town will host the games amid concerns about security and potential terrorist attacks.
The southern city of Volgograd was rocked by two suicide bombings in late December, which killed 34 and injured scores more. An Islamic militant group in Dagestan posted a video on Sunday claiming responsibility for the bombings and threatened to strike the games in Sochi, about 500 kilometers (300 miles) west of Dagestan.
McCaul, a Republican from Texas, said he had numerous meetings with officials in Moscow and Sochi, and was briefed by the joint operation center in Sochi, which is responsible for overall security in the area.
“The one improvement I would ask of the Russians is to allow our intelligence services to coordinate and cooperate better with theirs,” McCaul said. Although the Russian side was confident that it could provide security, the U.S. has information that could help keep the games safe, he said.
The congressman also expressed concern that terrorists could have gotten into Sochi before security was tightened.
“How many potential cells could be in Sochi and the Olympic village?” he said. “But after ‘the ring of steel’ was implemented we have this one person who seems to have been able to penetrate it. It does demonstrate vulnerability.”
Police material distributed to the hotel staff included pictures of two other women in veils: 26-year-old Zaira Aliyeva and 34-year-old Dzhannet Tsakhayeva. It said they had been trained “to perpetrate acts of terrorism.”
It warned that the two women “are probably among us,” but, unlike Ibragimova’s case, did not say if they are in Sochi.
No further information was provided about the two women or their motivation. The term “black widow” refers to the belief that women who have carried out past suicide attacks in Russia did so to avenge the deaths of husbands or other male relatives.
Security officials in Sochi were not available for comment on Tuesday.
The Olympics are to be held Feb. 7-23. Russia has mounted an intense security operation in the city, but concern persists that “soft targets” outside the Olympic venues, such as buses and tourist facilities, are vulnerable to attack.
Russian troops also have been active fighting militants in Dagestan, one of the predominantly Muslim republics in Russia’s North Caucasus and the center of an Islamic insurgency that has engulfed the region.
On Tuesday, troops shot dead the leader of a militant group, Interior Ministry spokeswoman Fatina Ubaidatova said. She said the militant, Eldar Magatov, was wanted in attacks on security forces, bombings and the extortion of businessmen.
Interior Ministry troops elsewhere in Dagestan defused an explosive device placed near a village administration building and engaged in a firefight with militants holed up in a house, the spokeswoman said.
_____
Associated Press writer Arsen Mollayev in Makhachkala, Russia, contributed to this report.
Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Monday, January 20, 2014

Martin Luther King Jr. and the catalyst of change

Martin Luther King Jr. and the catalyst of change
 
MARTIN LUTHER King Jr. preached nonviolence, practiced it and led a great movement guided by its principles. Yet surely he knew, as did most of his followers, that what they were doing would lead to violence. One need only look at the old black-and-white photos of civil rights protests, at the hatred, scorn and, perhaps most important, fear on the faces of some of the white people there to confront the demonstrators to understand how such simple acts as sitting down in a bus or entering a restaurant, seeking the right to vote or go to a better school, could lead to the worst sorts of violence a bitter truth that followed King to the day of his death.
 
Yet out of that violence came new understanding of a sort: People who had been all but invisible to much of the United States came to be seen through the newspapers and television as individual human beings : women and children being firehosed; war veterans returning home to be subjected to all the humiliations and restrictions of the time (or to be murdered, like Medgar Evers); polite young men trying to get a sandwich at a lunch counter; a dignified woman who refused to give up her seat on a bus; the children killed by a bomb in a Birmingham church. For many Americans, this marked the first time they had come face to face, or had allowed themselves to come face to face, with the cruelty of racial separation and oppression, a century after the official end of slavery.
 
It was not a new phenomenon. Many of the men who fought to preserve the Union probably most of them had little interest in freeing the slaves. Yet as they moved south, saw the faces and witnessed the conditions under which many enslaved people lived, they gained a new sympathy and understanding of how awful it was. Historian Allen Guelzo writes that Union naval officers “who had some chance ashore to see the remains of the slave system for themselves experienced great awakenings.” Adm. Samuel F. Du Pont, who acknowledged that he had once been “a sturdy conservative” on the question of slavery, “was horrified by the conditions he found on the coastal plantations,” writes Mr. Guelzo. Having seen the institution of slavery in person, Du Pont wrote to a friend, “may God forgive me for the words I have uttered in its defense as intertwined in our Constitution.”
 
The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was seen by some as a radical and a troublemaker. The truth is that he had considerable faith in America. He believed that when people saw the unfairness of the caste system that had grown up in their country in a nation founded on the principles of equality before the law, the opportunity to advance in life according to one’s merits, the right to choose the people who govern us they would understand how truly un-American it was and it would all come to an end, and much of it has.
 

Sunday, January 19, 2014

When students misbehave, schools need to discipline them

  

When students misbehave, schools need to discipline them



A look at some of our favorite images of the week.
      
I am the parent of a boy who, along with two of his friends, painted graffiti on an exterior wall of a Fairfax County public school a few years back. I am unaware of the punishments the other boys received, but my son was initially suspended and eventually excluded from attending that school. He was later reassigned to another school in the county.
At no time during the disciplinary process did anyone in our family point a finger at the school or the principal. It wasn’t their fault. Yet when the federal government last week unveiled new guidelines for trying to end racial disparities in school discipline, some of the conversation around the issue made it sound as though the schools and their staffs are at fault. A Jan. 10 Post editorial headline, “Discrimination in the principal’s office,” implied that principals are the problem and that they had better fix the “racially lopsided results” or else. I would respectfully suggest that this line of reasoning is a little lopsided.
Parents and students are responsible for bad behavior. In my son’s case, I took half of the responsibility for failing to provide sufficient parental guidance. My son assumed the other half for not making a better choice at 3 a.m., when his friends called him to “go have some fun.”
In announcing the new guidelines, aimed in part at avoiding punishment that keeps kids out of school, Education Secretary Arne Duncan expressed concern about students being “unsupervised” during suspensions. In fact, throughout my son’s suspension and every morning while he and I waited in our car for the county-provided bus to take him to his new school, he was not unsupervised but rather engaged in a conversation with his parents — his and every other student’s primary source of the adult mentorship the Education Department wants students to receive. We discussed why what he had done was unacceptable not only in school but also in any civilized society.
Granted, his choice that night did increase his risk “of economic and social problems,” as the guidelines pointed out, and he has endured the many consequences that followed. Those consequences were the result of my parenting and his choices, rather than a “racially lopsided” principal’s office.
Numbers can tell whatever story we want them to tell, especially when we color-code them. But when a student mouths off to a teacher, as I have witnessed in the Fairfax school where I am a sixth-grade teacher, the principal’s punishment is — as it should be — color-blind. A parent is the one who should have taught her child not to speak in this manner. And when a student decks another student in the face during gym class, as I have also seen, the principal’s punishment is also color-blind. Here, too, it is the parent who should have taught his child that this was not an acceptable action. Perhaps sending a courtesy copy of these guidelines to all parents of school-age children, regardless of color, would encourage new approaches to parenting that might assist schools and principals in preventing behaviors that simply cannot be tolerated.
I’m writing a newspaper commentary because my parents raised me to understand that this is an appropriate way to express myself. And if it gets me called into my principal’s office, I will not blame her or our school for the punishment I receive. Instead, I will follow my son’s example and take responsibility for my actions, apologize to those I have hurt and adjust my choices from that point forward. That’s what my son did, and he has come out on the other side as quite an incredible young man.

Saturday, January 18, 2014

Editorial

현장에서 SAT시험 영어부분을 한인 고교생들에게 가르치면서 느낀 점 하나는 대단히 소수의 학생들만이 SAT시험 에세이에서 좋은 점수를 받는다는 것이다. 다수의 우리 한인학생들이 SAT시험의 다른 영역에서는 비교적 높은 점수를 받지만 유독 SAT시험 에세이영역에서만은 형편없는 점수 내지는 평범한 점수에 머물고 만다. 이에 대해 필자는 다음과 같이 SAT 에세이에서 좋은 점수를 받는 비결을 세 가지로 정리해 보고자 한다.
 
첫째, SAT시험  에세이의 도입부분(Introduction)을 쓸 때 조금 더 인상적인(impressive)문장으로 시작하면 좋다. 왜냐하면, 한 사람의 채점관이 대단히 많은 분량의 에세이를 채점하기 때문에 그 사람에게 보다 인상적인 문장으로 시작되는 에세이는 자연 눈길을 끌기 때문이다. 다음은 평범한 도입부분과 인상적인 도입부분을 보여주는 사례이다.
 
SAT시험 에세이 주제: What in your opinion is the most serious problem facing the world today ?

학생 A의 도입부분 : I think the most serious problem facing the world today is global warming because it creates a lot of problems. Many countries around the world are becoming the victims of global warming. Global warming is getting worse and worse as humans develop more urban areas and pollute nature.
 
학생 B의 도입부분 : Every summer more powerful hurricanes hit the United States and Central American countries. Every spring American heartland states including Arkansas and Oklahoma witness huge casualites and damages caused by more frequent and strengthened tornadoes. Every winter New English states including Maine and Massachusetts are more prone to be helpless victims under an ever increasing amount of snowfall.  These abnormal natural phenomena are said to be triggered by global warming.
 
학생 A와 B 사이의 가장 큰 차이점은 SAT시험 에세이내용의 구체성과 참신성이 될 것이다. 따라서 학생들은 보다 구체적으로 그리고 보다 참신하게 주어진 주제에 관련된 내용들을 도입부분부터 적어나가야만 좋은 SAT시험 점수를 받을 수 있다.
 
둘째, SAT시험 에세이를 적어나가면서 최대한 반복적인 표현은 삼가 해야 한다. 왜냐하면, 미국인들 특히 채점관들은 같은 문단 내에서 반복되는 단어나 어구들을 병적으로 싫어하며 이것을 또한 지면을 억지로 채우려는 시도로 받아들이기도 한다.
 
학생 A 의 표현 : Global warming is affecting almost everyone and everything in the world. Global warming is killing many people and damaging valuable properties. Global warming is also causing the sea level to rise, which threatens the fate of low-lying countries including Denmark and the Netherlands.
 
학생 B의 표현 : Global warming is affecting almost everyone and everything in the world now.  It costs many human lives and damages valuable properties.  Also, it is causing the sea level to rise, which threatens the fate of low-lying countries including Denmark and the Netherlands.
 
학생 A와 B 사이의 표현의 가장 큰 차이는 바로 반복적인 표현 “global warming” 일 것이다. 이처럼, 같은 문단 내에서 동일한 단어나 표현을 반복하는 것은 절대로 삼가 해야 할 미덕인 것이다. 그러므로 일단 한번 나온 단어는 대명사 등을 사용하여 절대로 계속 반복되지 않도록 주의를 기울여야 한다. 만일, 그렇지 않으면 SAT서 점수를 잃게 될 것이다.
 
셋째, 에세이의 본문부분(Body)에서는 최대한 구체적인 표현들을 많이 쓰는 것이 중요하다.  따라서, 아주 생생하고 현실적인 표현들을 적절한 예를 들어가면서 적는 것이 추상적이고 애매모호한 표현들을 적절한 예를 들지 않고 두리뭉실하게 적는 것보다 훨씬 더 좋은 점수를 받게 만든다.
 
학생 A 의 표현 : Global warming is now widespread around the globe. Everyone in the world can feel its effects. No one can be free from global warming.
 
학생 B의 표현 : Whether we live in Bombay or Boston, we are under the constant influence of global warming.  We are having more frequent floods in Bombay during the Cyclone season and are having more serious damages from snowfall in Boston during the winter season.  No one can be free from these natural  retributions caused by global warming.
 
학생 A보다는 학생 B가 채점관으로부터 보다 높은 점수를 받게 될 것인데, 그 이유는 바로 구체적인 예와 생생한 표현 덕분일 것이다.

요컨대, SAT에세이에서 보다 높은 점수를 받기 위해서는, 도입부분에서 보다 인상적인 표현들을 사용해야 하며, 같은 문단 내에서 반복적인 단어나 표현들을 최대한 줄여야 하며, 본문부분에서는 최대한 구체적인 표현들을 적절한 예로써 제시해야 한다. 이렇게 할 때 학생들은 채점관들로부터 보다 후한 점수를 기대할 수 있다.  이를 위한 훌륭한 대비책은 바로 미국신문의 사설(Editorial)을 꼼꼼하게 읽으면서 미국사회와 전세계에서 발생하는 주요 사건, 사고들을 미국인들이 미국적인 표현법으로써 어떻게 생생하고 구체적으로 그리고 반복적인 표현 없이 기록하고 있는 지를 살피는 일일 것이다.
 
참고로, 미국의 주요 신문에서는 그 인터넷 판에서 무료로 그날 그날의 신문전체를 읽도록 허용하고 있는데,  워싱턴 포스트 www.washingtonpost.com, 뉴욕타임스 www.nyt.com, 시카고 트리뷴 www.chicagotribune.com, 유에스에이 투데이www.usatoday.com, 엘에이 타임스 www.latimes.com  등은 미국의 우수한 신문들이며, 이들 각 신문은 인터넷 판에 무료사설란을 지니고 있다. 따라서, 우리 한인 학생들이 이들 중 한 두 개의 신문을 선정하여 꾸준하게 주요 사설 기사들을 읽어나간다면 구체적이고 생생하게 많은 사건, 사고들을 미국적인 영어표현방식으로 접하게 됨으로써 나중에 SAT시험을 치를 때 아주 적절하게 이들을 인용하여 에세이에서 남들 보다 우수한 성적을 거두게 될 것이다.