<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: UNH07 A3: The UNH Longitudinal Study</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/10/16/unh07-a3-the-unh-longitudinal-study/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/10/16/unh07-a3-the-unh-longitudinal-study/</link>
	<description>faults &#124; sins &#124; abuses</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:21:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike G</title>
		<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/10/16/unh07-a3-the-unh-longitudinal-study/#comment-103359</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:12:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/10/17/unh07-a3-the-unh-longitudinal-study/#comment-103359</guid>
		<description>Great summary -- I think it's about as accurate as it can get.

A couple notes on the numbers, which I might have muddled a bit as I was rambling through that timeline. The summer '05 pilot involved only two students. Eight is actually the number of interviewees in the current (non-pilot) high school year. All of the other numbers you mention are correct.

You're right about the scope -- that's our biggest concern as well as that of practically everyone who comes in contact with the study. It's just too broad, they say. But I think we've become pretty good at post hoc focusing. I'm fond of referring to the study as journalism: we're examining a huge set of phenomena, events and patterns and (hopefully) making good decisions regarding the fraction of them we choose to highlight and develop.

Thanks for the review.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great summary &#8212; I think it&#8217;s about as accurate as it can get.</p>
<p>A couple notes on the numbers, which I might have muddled a bit as I was rambling through that timeline. The summer &#8216;05 pilot involved only two students. Eight is actually the number of interviewees in the current (non-pilot) high school year. All of the other numbers you mention are correct.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re right about the scope &#8212; that&#8217;s our biggest concern as well as that of practically everyone who comes in contact with the study. It&#8217;s just too broad, they say. But I think we&#8217;ve become pretty good at post hoc focusing. I&#8217;m fond of referring to the study as journalism: we&#8217;re examining a huge set of phenomena, events and patterns and (hopefully) making good decisions regarding the fraction of them we choose to highlight and develop.</p>
<p>Thanks for the review.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
