Posts tagged review
CU seeks more female computer geeks
Oct 24th
TECHNOLOGY WORKFORCE WITH MORE
WOMEN IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
The University of Colorado Boulder today announced that it has implemented several new programs over the past three years designed to make computer science more female-friendly, with the larger goal of increasing the number of women employed in technology roles nationwide.
The programs are starting to pay off with the number of women enrolled in CU-Boulder’s Bachelor of Science in computer science degree more than doubling from 18 students in 2007 (8 percent of majors at that time) to 47 students (17 percent of current majors) in 2011, said Professor James Martin, chair of the Department of Computer Science.
The Department of Computer Science at CU-Boulder is working to increase its female student enrollment through enhanced outreach to high schools, new content in its introductory computing courses designed to appeal to non-computing majors, better community support for female computer science majors and work on a new computer science degree program for students in the College of Arts and Sciences.
The new content in the introductory computing courses moves away from traditional, abstract examples of linked lists and binary trees to adopt a media-based focus in which students develop programs to manipulate sounds and process images, Martin said.
The new degree program, which is currently under review, is a Bachelor of Arts degree in computer science that would allow students in the College of Arts and Sciences to major in computer science while also providing space in their curriculum to earn a major or minor in another field of study. It is hoped that this new degree will lead to further increases in the number of women taking computer science due to the more balanced gender demographics of the College of Arts and Sciences, Martin said.
Taken together, the initiatives are designed to attract women to the field who might otherwise have dismissed computer science as being too focused on programming without realizing the positive impact computer science can have on society and people’s quality of life.
The efforts are part of the Department of Computer Science’s participation in NCWIT Pacesetters, a fast-track program from the National Center for Women & Information Technology in which universities and corporations commit to increasing their numbers of women in technical fields. Pacesetters organizations work to recruit previously untapped talent pools and retain women who are at risk of leaving, resulting in “net new” women for the computing and IT workforce.
“We’re excited to see a growing number of women take interest in our computer science degree programs,” Martin said. “It’s great for the discipline of computer science as a whole to have participation by a broader range of backgrounds and perspectives. We also see room for growth. Women currently make up 17 percent of our undergraduate program; we would like to see that percentage increase to support the national goal of NCWIT to achieve gender parity in information technology over the next 20 years.”
Ken Anderson, associate professor and director of undergraduate studies for the Department of Computer Science, agrees. “Our work as part of Pacesetters has spurred improvements across our entire undergraduate program. These improvements, while designed to attract more participation in computer science by women, result in a higher quality experience for all of our students.”
The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that more than 1.4 million computing-related jobs will be available in the U.S. workforce by 2018, yet by current trends American colleges and universities will produce less than one-third of the trained graduates needed to fill these jobs. Increasing the participation of women, who currently represent half the professional workforce but hold only 25 percent of technology jobs, holds the potential to increase both the quantity and quality of U.S. technical talent.
The current cohort of NCWIT Pacesetters organizations includes Apple Inc.; AT&T Corp.; ATLAS Institute; Bank of America; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Cal Poly San Luis Obispo; Carnegie Mellon University; Georgia Institute of Technology; Google Inc.; IBM Corp.; Indiana University; Intel Corp.; Microsoft Corp.; Pfizer Inc.; Qualcomm Inc.; Santa Clara University; University of California, Irvine; University of California, Santa Cruz; University of Colorado Boulder; University of Texas at Austin; University of Virginia; University of Washington; Villanova; and Virginia Tech.
-CU-
Boulders’ Capt. Underpants ( Seth Brigham) rides again
Oct 15th
Why did the Boulder Police Department stop at two witnesses being interviewed when I gave them three additional witnesses that also had a recollection of events similar to mine?
Chief Beckner? is it because you might be getting too close to the truth, that your officer actions were uncalled for and she lied about the incident after the fact to cover her own wrongdoing.
Seth Brigham
720-298-6711
On Oct 15, 2011, at 10:01 AM, SETH BRIGHAM wrote:
It seems my written request to The Boulder Police Department changed their mind, when I received a call to pick up some materials, no thanks to Tom Carr, who denied my request.
Still, they claimed to have no documents in the property/evidence department. There are no documents, notes, e-mails, communications other than the Police Report 11-6851?
I would expect there must still be a file of documents, something, that pertains to the case, like detective notes, e-mails, for example, between myself and Chief Beckner and Yamaguchi?
I have those e-mails.*
But, there is no record of that?
As well, I made an official complaint of the actions of the arresting officer to Sgt. Kerry Yamaguchi who was supposed to investigate such complaints. I never got a response from Yamaguchi.
So, no investigation was pursued or Beckner took it upon himself to have two witnesses I identified to be contacted and interviewed? He e-mailed a response to me but that’s not part of the record?
Isn’t any action by The Police department or public officials in regard to my charges, arrest, saved as evidence? And, I expect, suspect, that there was some communication between public officials about my arrest.
Surely, there is more that the Boulder police department has than this “evidence” on CD of two interviews* of two witnesses and photographs* of the “scene” that came about due to my advocacy, my complaint.
So, my request is down to any documents or e-mails, communications between the parties; The City of Boulder, any public officials, City Manager, even Carr… The Boulder Police department? in regard to my arrest on June 3rd, 2011.
Strange, I thought they saved any and all, as required in case there is a defense ? I suspect some “meddling” by Boulder Public officials ( that includes member or members of City Council, City Manager and/or City Attorney as evidenced by the reckless and defamatory Press release ), so I ask, request, that you fish for all “documents” other than that I have described as getting *.
Seth Brigham
3383 Madison Avenue #W225
Boulder, Colorado
80303
720-298-6711
On Oct 14, 2011, at 12:07 PM, North, Sandy wrote:
C I T Y O F B O U L D E R, C O L O R A D O
Office of the City Manager
Municipal Building
1777 Broadway
Post Office Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306
Telephone (303) 441-3059
Facsimile (303) 441-4925
Date: 10/14/2011
Recipient: Seth Brigham
Address:
E-mail reply only: Sethbrigham@gmail.com
Re: Open Records Request: duplication of all the documents, photographs, interview of witnesses, everything and anything related to my arrest on June 3rd, 2011, case/ report 11-6851
Dear Mr. Brigham,
The City of Boulder has received your open records request, pursuant to C.R.S. 24-72-201. This request was received in the office of Central Records on October 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM.
The City’s policy on open records requests is to assess a reasonable charge for research, retrieval and copying of records to allow recovery of the value of a portion of staff time required to respond to open records requests. An estimate of the cost of this request will follow and compiling of the requested information will begin as soon as we receive payment. Because this request is considered voluminous in the amount of time required, you have the opportunity to review your request and determine if you would like to revise, redefine, and narrow the scope of your request.
The city can provide only public records that are not privileged and documents that already exist. The city does not have the resources to compile information in all forms requested, but will provide the records only in the form maintained by the city. Common privileges for documents include and are not limited to attorney/client work-product. Work product and drafts which are advisory or deliberative in nature and which are created for the benefit of elected officials are not public records. Furthermore, documents where release is contrary to the public interest may be withheld in accordance with the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. 24-72-201, et seq.
An additional per page fee for copying may be assessed at .25 for a letter size black and white copy, and payment for the copies is required prior to pick up.
Sincerely,
Sandy North
To: North, Sandy
Cc: Council; Brautigam, Jane; Urie, Heath; Erica Meltzer; Pamela White; Jefferson Dodge; Christopher Dodd; David Lane; juddgolden@hotmail.com golden; Philip M Bienvenu; Smoke, Rob; Jann Scott; OpenForum; Erika Stutzman; Michael Roberts
Subject: Open records request for all documents, duplication of materials related to Police report/ case 11-6851
Dear City of Boulder Records,
I am requesting a duplication of all the documents, photographs,
interview of witnesses, everything and anything related to my arrest
on June 3rd, 2011, case/ report 11-6851 …
I am requesting anything pertaining to the case, other than the police
report itself, from the Boulder Police Department, The City of Boulder
and any public officials who may have become involved in any way,
shape or manner.
I have previously agreed to a deferred prosecution, which means that
the case is not pending, and I am considered innocent until proven
guilty.
There is no trial set. And, if there were, I would have the right to
these materials, evidence. If the charges were dropped, I would still
have that right.
Under law, the person, I, Seth Brigham, to whom the records pertain
has the right to obtain the records.
A criminal justice record means any writing made, any materials,
evidence, maintained, or kept by a criminal justice agency.
I believe this also goes for Boulder City Government.
It is my suspicion that public officials may have intervened in my
case and their may be communications between the parties; Boulder
Police department, City Attorney, City manager, City Council member(s)
that may have “prejudiced” my case,
as a Press release was released by the City attorney with consent from
The City manager and /or other public officials immediately after I
agreed to a deferred prosecution.
I had no idea there was a vendetta against me, retribution for finding
the City of Boulder at fault in another arrest of myself, Seth Brigham.
I believe charges would have been dropped had I not been Seth Brigham.
Review the Police report and you will see what a weak case the
prosecution had.
Records of official actions must be disclosed by the criminal justice
agencies when requested. I believe the same goes for The City of
Boulder and Boulder public officials.
It is a basic right. And, one would wonder why our fair city would
deny me this right except that they are covering up their own
wrongdoing(S).
So, what is the City of Boulder and the Boulder Police department
afraid of. They have already convicted me in the press.
Do I not have the right to the information needed to clear my name and
show that wrongdoing by the Boulder police department; false arrest
and infringement on my right to free speech.
Does the city have a right to cover their “tracks” in fear that they
will be sued??? The City Attorney refused to back off his statement
which was filled with lies and slander and now he is afraid that the
evidence will show otherwise.
Is this open government in action in Boulder? I think not.
Seth Brigham
3383 Madison Avenue #W225
Boulder, Colorado
80303
720-298-6711
Boulder County sustainable ag group to get lit review
Sep 15th
Boulder County, Colo. – The findings of a Sustainable Agriculture Literature Review will be presented to Boulder County’s Parks and Open Space Advisory Committee and Food and Agriculture Policy Council at a public meeting on Sept. 22.
Who: Hunter Lovins and Nick Sterling of Natural Capitalism Solutions will present
What: The presentation will precede the regularly scheduled POSAC meeting
When: Thursday, Sept. 22, 5:30 p.m.
Where: Commissioners’ Hearing Room, Boulder County Courthouse, third floor, 1325 Pearl St., Boulder
The Sustainable Agriculture Literature Review is available at www.BoulderCountyOpenSpace.org/croplandpolicy.
Longmont-based Natural Capitalism Solutions’ report examines sustainable agriculture practices related to energy, water use, climate, soil health, pest management, biodiversity, labor, human health and the local economy. It also studies primarily peer-reviewed research, and identifies data gaps and areas where further research is needed.
The Sustainable Agriculture Literature Review will support and inform the work of the Cropland Policy Advisory Group and Parks and Open Space staff in their work to create a Cropland Policy for Boulder County open space lands.
Cropland Policy
The effort to develop a management policy for county-owned croplands began in 2010 with public outreach, including farm tours, an open house, a Sustainable Agriculture Forum and a Farm and Ranch Panel Discussion.
In 2011, the Board of County Commissioners convened the Cropland Policy Advisory Group to advise Boulder County staff in developing the policy. The members of the CPAG are developing recommendations for the Cropland Policy through discussion and proposed policy statements.
The CPAG policy recommendations will be finalized in early October, and will go through a public hearing process in October and November with another open house, hearings before the Parks and Open Space Advisory Committee and Food and Agriculture Policy Council in November and December. The Board of County Commissioners will make the final policy decisions.





















