baseballpoliticslife: 2012

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

1. Singapore

Science score: 583

Math Score: 606

Reading and literacy score: 567

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from PIRLS
2011 were added up to determine rank

.Back Home

2. Hong Kong

melanie_ko via flickr Creative Commons

Science score: 535

Math Score: 602

Reading and literacy score: 571

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

3. Chinese Taipei

via flickr Creative Commons

Science score: 552

Math Score: 591

Reading and literacy score: 553

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

4. Finland

Shutterstock / BlueOrangeStudio

Science score: 570

Math Score: 545

Reading and literacy score: 568

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

5. Russia

peretzp via flickr Creative Commons

Science score: 552

Math Score: 542

Reading and literacy score: 568

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

6. United States

White House via Flickr

Science score: 544

Math Score: 541

Reading and literacy score: 556

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

7. Northern Ireland (UK)

Math Score: 562

Reading and literacy score: 558

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

8. England

Math Score: 542

Reading and literacy score: 552

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

9. Denmark

Lars Plougmann on flickr

Science score: 528

Math Score: 537

Reading and literacy score: 554

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

10. Netherlands

Math Score: 540

Reading and literacy score: 546

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

11. Germany

Roman-Achim.G. on flickr

Science score: 528

Math Score: 528

Reading and literacy score: 541

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
IRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

12. Ireland

kthypryn on flickr

Science score: 516

Math Score: 527

Reading and literacy score: 552

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

13. Portugal

Math Score: 532

Reading and literacy score: 541

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

14. Czech Republic

momentcaptured1 on flickr

Science score: 536

Math Score: 511

Reading and literacy score: 545

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

15. Hungary

magnusfranklin on flickr

Science score: 534

Math Score: 515

Reading and literacy score: 539

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Back Home-Next

16. Sweden

Swedish Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010 via flickr Creative Commons

Science score: 533

Math Score: 504

Reading and literacy score: 542

Science and math scores from TIMSS 2011 and reading and literacy scores from
PIRLS 2011 were added up to determine rank.

Waterfall beneath Frog Bridge roadway (North-South view)

Under Frog Bridge #2

Last Picture Next

Back Home

Waterfall directly beneath roadway (North to south view)

Last Picture Next

Back Home

Under the Frog Bridge #18

Picture Next
Back Home

Gate control, Jillson House in background (South view)

Back Home

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Tin Tsin Letter from James Grant, engineer

This Letter pronounces the demise of the Tin Tsin Building on Main St
See article, "Roof. Roof. Roof:"

James K Grant
Structural Engineers

November 20, 2003

Michael Paulhus, First Selectman
Town of Windham
979 Main Street
Willimantic. CT 06226

Re: The Tin Tsin Building

Dear Mr Paulhus

On Tuesday, November 18, 2003, I inspected the Tin Tsin Building with Town Engineer, Joe Gardner. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the current structural condition of the building. My most recent prior inspection was in June during preparation of plans to stabilize the building. My earliest inspection was in August 2000 when I was engaged by the town to conduct a structural condition survey.

Over the more then the three year period that I have been inspecting this building it has quickly deteriorated from a structure with a few problem areas to one with widespread structural problems. The facade of the building was, and still is, the most important and structurally sound part of the building. Since June, however, the condition of the interior of the building has spiraled downward. There are more collapsed floor and roof areas and I believe that the exterior walls have lost a great deal of lateral support that the floors and roof once offered. Without sound structural support at each framing level, the walls can become unstable and subject to collapse without warning. With the possibility of heavy snow load now upon us ,it is imperative that the conditions be addressed at once. Further collapse of an already weakened roof would lead to progressive collapse of additional floor levels and likely collapse of some exterior walls.

The stabilization project that was recently bid would have provided the necessary corrective work, but the lowest responsive bid exceeded the available funds. Unless the funding shortfall is satisfied so that the stabilization work can begin immediately, I believe there is no feasible and prudent alternative to demolition of the building. Plans to demolish the building should proceed without delay

Sincerely

James K Grant, P.E.

Copy: Susan Chandler, State Historic Preservation Office

2074 Park Street, Hartford CT 06106
Tel:860-236-5236: Fax: 523-7967