Home

Article:

“What Works. School/College Partnerships To Improve Poor and Minority Student Achievement.”

Author(s):  Stoel, Carol

Source:  94 pp.

Peer Reviewed: N/A

Publication Date:1992

Abstract:

This guide provides an overview of the types and dimensions of partnership programs between institutions of higher education and elementary or secondary schools, how they operate, and their importance as a strategy for educational reform. The guide is divided into four parts which cover: (1) background context; (2) strategies used by successful programs; (3) descriptions of partnerships to improve student achievement within various categories of focus; and (4) sources of additional information about collaboration. Descriptions of early identification programs include those at the University of Missouri at St. Louis, George Mason University (Virginia), and Ohio State University. Descriptions of dropout prevention programs include those at Virginia Commonwealth University, Kean College (New Jersey), and Rancho Santiago Community College (California). Program descriptions focusing on curriculum and teaching include Hunter College (New York), University of California at Santa Cruz, and the University of California at Berkeley. Also described are college access programs at Connecticut College, the University of Missouri at St. Louis, Dickinson College (Pennsylvania), Wabash College (New Jersey), and Xavier University (New Orleans). Programs organized as schools on college campuses include Shelby State Community College (Tennessee) and LaGuardia Community College New York). Comprehensive programs are described for Maricopa Community Colleges (Arizona), University of California at Irvine, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (Texas), and Arizona State University. (JLS)

American Association for Higher Education, Washington, DC.

Article:

 “Expanding Access to Early Head Start: State Initiatives for Infants & Toddlers at Risk”

Author(s): Colvard, Jamie ; Schmit, Stephanie

Source: Center for Law and Social Policy, Inc. (CLASP). 23 pp.

Peer Reviewed: N/A

Publication Date: 2012

Descriptors:

Federal Programs, State Programs, Family Programs, Low Income Groups, Infants, Toddlers, At Risk Persons, Child Development, Pregnancy, Access to Education, Access to Health Care, Home Visits, State Policy, Child Care, State Aid, Federal Aid, Private Financial Support, Early Childhood Education, Preschool Education

Abstract:

The federal Early Head Start (EHS) program was created in 1994 to address the comprehensive needs of children under age 3 in low-income families and vulnerable low-income pregnant women. In addition to early learning opportunities, EHS’s comprehensive early childhood development programs provide children and families with access to a range of services such as health screenings, referrals and follow-up support, parenting resources, and social services. Despite the program’s proven ability to lessen the negative effects of poverty, consistently low levels of federal funding and increasing child poverty have kept the program’s capacity low. Even the $1.1 billion increase in federal funding from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)–which increased the total number of children and pregnant women served from 93,287 in 2009 to 133,971 in 2010–failed to significantly change the percentage of those eligible who were served because poverty also increased over the same period. Using innovative funding, policies, and partnerships, states can expand the critically important EHS program and better meet the needs of more low-income children and pregnant women living in their state. In 2008, ZERO TO THREE and CLASP released “Building on the Promise: State Initiatives to Expand Access to Early Head Start for Young Children and their Families,” which outlined the diverse ways states expanded upon or enhanced EHS services for infants, toddlers, and their families. At that time, the researchers found 20 states with some efforts to expand or enhance EHS services at the state level. This report provides updated information on how states are supplementing EHS four years later. Initiatives that extend the day or year of existing services are appended. (Contains 14 endnotes.)

Abstractor: ERIC

Corporate Source:  Center for Law and Social Policy
ZERO TO THREE: National Center for Infants, Toddlers and Families

Sponsoring Agency:  Birth to Five Policy Alliance

Number of Pages:  23

Publication Type:  Reports – Descriptive

Availability:  Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED538046
Center for Law and Social Policy. 1015 15th Street NW Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. Tel: 202-906-8000; Fax: 202-842-2885; Web site: http://www.clasp.org

Journal Code: JAN2013

Entry Date: 2013

Accession Number: ED538046

Database: ERIC

Article:

“Students Training for Academic Readiness (STAR): Year Five Evaluation Report”

Author(s):  Maloney, Catherine ; Lopez, Omar

Source: Texas Center for Educational Research. 308 pp.

Peer Reviewed: N/A

Publication Date:  2012

Descriptors:

College Readiness, Economically Disadvantaged, Low Income Groups, Minority Group Students, Limited English Speaking, Middle School Students, High School Students, Federal Programs, Federal Aid, Grants, State Programs, Access to Education, Access to Information, College Preparation, Student Characteristics, Academic Achievement, Program Implementation, Academic Standards, Teacher Participation, Faculty Development, Learner Engagement, Parents, Educational Environment, Parent Participation, Institutional Characteristics, Alignment (Education), Advanced Courses, Community Support, Partnerships in Education, Middle Schools, High Schools, Program Effectiveness, Grade 10, Grade 11, Grade 12, Grade 7, Grade 8, Grade 9, High Schools, Junior High Schools, Middle Schools, Secondary Education

Identifiers: Texas

Abstract:

Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, or GEAR UP, is a federally-funded system of grants that focuses on preparing low-income students to enter and succeed in postsecondary educational programs. GEAR UP grants extend across 6 school years and require that funded districts begin providing grant services to students no later than the seventh grade and continue services until students graduate from high school. GEAR UP also requires that districts implement a cohort model in which services are provided to all students in participating grade levels rather than to select groups of students. The United States Department of Education (USDE) provides for two types of GEAR UP grants: (1) partnerships grants made up of school districts, colleges or universities, and other organizations, and (2) state grants administered by state agencies, either alone or in partnership with other entities. Since 2006, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) has implemented a state-level GEAR UP grant, known as Students Training for Academic Readiness, or STAR. STAR is implemented in six school districts in south Texas that serve large proportions of low-income and minority students. These districts include Alice ISD, Brooks County ISD, Corpus Christi ISD, Kingsville ISD, Mathis ISD, and Odem-Edroy ISD. In each district, a high school and its associated feeder pattern middle school participates in STAR. The 6-year implementation period for STAR spans the 2006-07 through 2011-12 school years, and began with an initial seventh-grade cohort in 2006-07. As this cohort has progressed through school, STAR’s services have expanded to include additional grade levels. In 2010-11, the grant’s fifth implementation year, the lead seventh-grade cohort was in the eleventh grade and STAR services were provided to all students in Grades 7 through 11. GEAR UP grant requirements also include an evaluation component designed to assess effectiveness and measure progress toward project goals. The findings presented in this report make up the fifth year evaluation of the state’s GEAR UP/STAR project. Appended are: (1) Results from the Spring 2011 Teacher, Counselor, Librarian Survey; (2) Results from the Spring 2011 Parent Survey; (3) Results from the Spring 2011 Middle School Student Survey; (4) Results from the Spring 2011 High School Student Survey; (5) Instruments and Protocols; (6) STAR Goals and Objectives for the Statewide and District Programs; (7) Implementation Analysis: Data Sources and Methodology; (8) Implementation Analysis: Scoring Rubric; and (9) Advanced Course Performance Measures. (Contains 111 tables, 56 figures and 24 footnotes.) [For “Students Training for Academic Readiness (STAR): Year Five Evaluation Report. Executive Summary,” see ED535981. For “Students Training for Academic Readiness (STAR): Year Four Evaluation Report,” see ED535980.]

Abstractor:  ERIC

Number of References: 30

Corporate Source:  Texas Center for Educational Research, Austin.

Sponsoring Agency:  Texas Education Agency

Number of Pages:  308

Publication Type:  Numerical/Quantitative Data; Reports – Evaluative; Tests/Questionnaires

Availability:  Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED535983
Texas Center for Educational Research. P.O. Box 679002, Austin, TX 78767. Tel: 800-580-8237; Tel: 512-467-3632; Fax: 512-467-3658; e-mail: tcer@tcer.org; Web site: http://www.tcer.org

Journal Code:  OCT2012

Entry Date: 2012

Accession Number:  ED535983

Database:  ERIC

Article:

“Students Training for Academic Readiness (STAR): Year Five Evaluation Report. Executive Summary”

Source:  Texas Center for Educational Research. 8 pp.

Peer Reviewed: N/A

Publication Date:  2012

Descriptors:

College Readiness, Economically Disadvantaged, Low Income Groups, Minority Group Students, Limited English Speaking, Middle School Students, High School Students, Federal Programs, Federal Aid, Grants, State Programs, Access to Education, Access to Information, College Preparation, Student Characteristics, Academic Achievement, Program Implementation, Academic Standards, Teacher Participation, Faculty Development, Learner Engagement, Parents, Educational Environment, Parent Participation, Community Support, Alignment (Education), Advanced Courses, Middle Schools, High Schools, Program Effectiveness, Grade 10, Grade 11, Grade 12, Grade 7, Grade 8, Grade 9, Junior High Schools, Middle Schools, Secondary Education

Identifiers:  Texas

Abstract:

Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, or GEAR UP, is a federally-funded system of grants that focuses on preparing low-income students to enter and succeed in postsecondary educational programs. GEAR UP grants extend across 6 school years and require that funded districts begin providing grant services to students no later than the seventh grade and continue services until students graduate from high school. GEAR UP also requires that districts implement a cohort model in which services are provided to all students in participating grade levels rather than to select groups of students. The United States Department of Education (USDE) provides for two types of GEAR UP grants: (1) partnerships grants made up of school districts, colleges or universities, and other organizations, and (2) state grants administered by state agencies, either alone or in partnership with other entities. Since 2006, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) has implemented a state-level GEAR UP grant, known as Students Training for Academic Readiness, or STAR. STAR is implemented in six school districts in south Texas that serve large proportions of low-income and minority students. These districts include Alice ISD, Brooks County ISD, Corpus Christi ISD, Kingsville ISD, Mathis ISD, and Odem-Edroy ISD. In each district, a high school and its associated feeder pattern middle school participates in STAR. The 6-year implementation period for STAR spans the 2006-07 through 2011-12 school years, and began with an lead seventh-grade cohort in 2006-07. As this cohort has progressed through school, STAR’s services have expanded to include additional grade levels. In 2010-11, the grant’s fifth implementation year, the initial seventh-grade cohort was in the eleventh grade and STAR services were provided to all students in Grades 7 through 11. GEAR UP grant requirements also include an evaluation component designed to assess effectiveness and measure progress toward project goals. The findings presented in this executive summary make up the fifth year evaluation of the state’s GEAR UP/STAR project. The evaluation is limited to the GEAR UP state grant (i.e., STAR) and does not include GEAR UP partnership grants awarded to other entities in Texas. (Contains 6 footnotes.) [For the full report, “Students Training for Academic Readiness (STAR): Year Five Evaluation Report,” see ED535983.]

Abstractor:  ERIC

Corporate Source:  Texas Center for Educational Research (TCER)

Number of Pages: 8

Publication Type:  Reports – Evaluative

Availability:

Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED535981
Texas Center for Educational Research. P.O. Box 679002, Austin, TX 78767. Tel: 800-580-8237; Tel: 512-467-3632; Fax: 512-467-3658; e-mail: tcer@tcer.org; Web site: http://www.tcer.org

Journal Code: OCT2012

Entry Date: 2012

Accession Number:  ED535981

Database:  ERIC

Article:

“The Role of Community-Based Organizations in the College Access and Success Movement. Research to Practice Brief”

Author(s):  Coles, Ann

Source:  Pathways to College Network. 8 pp.

Peer Reviewed:  N/A

Publication Date:  2012

Descriptors:

Stakeholders, Play, Community Leaders, Community Organizations, Elementary Secondary Education, Theory Practice Relationship, Community Role, Institutional Role, Access to Education, Outreach Programs, Developmental Studies Programs, Community Support, Program Effectiveness, College Preparation, Best Practices, Partnerships in Education, Elementary Secondary Education, Higher Education

Abstract:

In recent years, leaders of American cities have become progressively concerned about increasing the college-going and completion rate of their residents. Mayors and other community leaders in Memphis, Boston, Louisville, San Francisco and other cities have launched initiatives to increase college completion rates, mobilizing stakeholders from the education, non-profit, and corporate sectors to share responsibility for achieving these goals. To a large extent, efforts to increase college-going and completion rates have focused on making changes in K-12 and higher education systems to ensure that young people finish high school ready for college and complete degrees in a timely manner. But, today there is growing recognition of the important role that community-based organizations (CBOs) can play in supporting young people’s postsecondary aspirations and success. This brief highlights research focused on the role and impact of community-based organizations in the college access and success movement and the implications of this research for improving practice. It also describes the experiences of one CBO in helping students access and succeed in college. CBOs play an important role in the education pathways for many students. A useful model for understanding these pathways and where CBOs can assist is the Insulated Education Pipeline, created by the Forum for Youth Investment. The pipeline illustrates the various ways community organizations provide support to young people along the education continuum from early childhood through postsecondary completion and successful entry into the workforce. (Contains 3 figures and 14 footnotes.)

Abstractor:  ERIC

Corporate Source:  Education Resources Institute, Pathways to College Network

Number of Pages:  8

Publication Type:  Reports – Descriptive

Availability:

Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED539741
Pathways to College Network. Available from: Institute for Higher Education Policy. 1825 K Street Suite 720, Washington, DC 20006. Tel: 202-861-8223; Fax: 202-861-9307; e-mail: institute@ihep.org; Web site: http://www.pathwaystocollege.net

Journal Code:  MAR2013

Entry Date:  2013

Accession Number:  ED539741

Database:  ERIC

 

Article:

“What Works Clearinghouse Quick Review: “Expanding College Opportunities for High-Achieving, Low Income Students”

Source:  What Works Clearinghouse. 2 pp.

Peer Reviewed: Yes

Publication Date: 2013

Descriptors:

High School Seniors, High Achievement, Economically Disadvantaged, Access to Education, College Applicants, Guidance, Student Costs, Access to Information, Intervention, Educational Research, Program Effectiveness, College Admission, Enrollment, Grade 12, High Schools, Higher Education, Postsecondary Education, Secondary Education

Abstract:

This study examined the effects of providing low-income, high-achieving high school seniors with college application guidance and information about the costs of college. The “application guidance” included information about deadlines and requirements for college applications at nearby institutions, at the state’s flagship institution, and at in- and out-of-state selective colleges. The study reported that the intervention increased the percentage of students who: (a) applied to a selective institution (from 55% to 67%), (b) were admitted to a selective institution (from 30% to 39%), and (c) enrolled in a selective institution (from 29% to 34%). Students in the intervention group also completed more admissions applications, and were admitted to more colleges, than students in the comparison group. All of these differences were statistically significant. The study is a randomized controlled trial. As such it could potentially “meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards without reservations.” However, there was attrition in the overall study sample, and more information is needed to determine whether attrition rates were similar in the intervention and comparison groups. A more thorough review (forthcoming) will explore this issue further and will determine the final study rating. [The following study is reviewed in this “Quick Review”: Hoxby, C., & Turner, S. (2013). “Expanding college opportunities for high-achieving, low income students.” Stanford, CA: Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.]

Abstractor:  ERIC

Corporate Source:  What Works Clearinghouse (ED)

Number of Pages:  2

Publication Type:  Reports – Evaluative

Availability:

Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED541522
What Works Clearinghouse. P.O. Box 2393, Princeton, NJ 08543-2393. Tel: 866-503-6114; e-mail: info@whatworks.ed.gov; Web site: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

Journal Code:  APR2013

Entry Date:  2013

Accession Number: ED541522

Database: ERIC

 Article:

“Unequal Education: Federal Loophole Enables Lower Spending on Students of Color”

Author(s):  Spatig-Amerikaner, Ary

Source: Center for American Progress. 56 pp.

Peer Reviewed:  N/A

Publication Date:  2012

Descriptors:

Equal Education, African American Students, Racial Segregation, White Students, Public Education, Federal Government, Access to Education, Civil Rights, Court Litigation, Minority Groups, Racial Discrimination, Expenditure per Student, Educational Finance, State Government, Local Government, Measurement Techniques, Federal Legislation, Educational Legislation, School Districts, Budgets, Resource Allocation, Elementary Secondary Education

Identifiers:  Brown v Board of Education, Elementary Secondary Education Act Title I

Abstract:

In 1954 the Supreme Court declared that public education is “a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.” That landmark decision in “Brown v. Board of Education” stood for the proposition that the federal government would no longer allow states and municipalities to deny equal educational opportunity to a historically oppressed racial minority. Ruling unanimously, the justices overturned the noxious concept that “separate” education could ever be “equal.” Yet today, nearly 60 years later, our schools remain separate and unequal. Almost 40 percent of black and Hispanic students attend schools where more than 90 percent of students are nonwhite. The average white student attends a school where 77 percent of his or her peers are also white. Schools today are “as segregated as they were in the 1960s before busing began.” We are living in a world in which schools are patently separate. In “Brown” the Court focused on the detrimental impact of legal separation–the fact that official segregation symbolized and reinforced the degraded status of blacks in America. Today’s racial separation in schools may not have the formal mandate of local law, but it just as surely reflects and reinforces lingering status differences between whites and nonwhites by enabling a system of public education funding that shortchanges students of color. Separate will always be unequal. But just how unequal is the education we offer our students of color today? This paper answers this question using one small but important measure–per-pupil state and local spending. This fraction of spending is certainly not the only useful measure of educational opportunity. How we spend our money is perhaps more important. But newly released data give us the opportunity to shed new light, specifically on inequity in spending from state and local sources. The new dataset is appended. (Contains 5 tables, 7 figures and 76 endnotes.)

Abstractor: ERIC

Corporate Source:  Center for American Progress

Sponsoring Agency:  Ford Foundation

Number of Pages:  56

Publication Type:  Reports – Evaluative

Availability:

Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED535549
Center for American Progress. 1333 H Street NW 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20005. Tel: 202-682-1611; Web site: http://www.americanprogress.org

Journal Code:  OCT2012

Entry Date:  2012

Accession Number:  ED535549

Database: ERIC

Article:

“Perceived Barriers for First-Generation Students: Reforms to Level the Terrain”

Author(s):  Unverferth, Anthony Richard ; Talbert-Johnson, Carolyn ; Bogard, Treavor

Source:  International Journal of Educational Reform, v21 n4 p238-252 Fall 2012. 15 pp.

Peer Reviewed:  Yes

ISSN:  1056-7879

Descriptors:

Access to Information, Enrollment, First Generation College Students, College Freshmen, Undergraduate Students, Parent Background, Educational Attainment, Student Characteristics, College Preparation, College Readiness, Access to Education, Low Income Groups, Minority Group Students, Paying for College, College Admission, Higher Education, Postsecondary Education

Identifiers:  Ohio

Abstract:

This article examines the pervasive difficulties experienced by first-generation students in their quest to attend postsecondary settings. A change in the profile of the undergraduate student body has changed dramatically with respect to first-generation students’ age, enrollment status, and family conditions. These students are likely to enter college with less academic preparation and have limited access to information about the college experience. Low-income, minority, first-generation students are especially likely to lack specific types of college knowledge, which includes knowing how to finance a college education and complete basic admissions requirements. For these students to be successful, it is imperative to understand the pervasive obstacles they may encounter. The article identifies the challenges that first-generation students experience and their perceptions regarding the postsecondary experience, and it concludes with recommendations for successful academic practices. (Contains 4 tables.)

Abstractor:  As Provided

Number of References:  29

Number of Pages:  15

Publication Type:  Journal Articles; Reports – Research

Availability:

Rowman & Littlefield. 4501 Forbes Boulevard Suite 200, Lanham, MD 20706. Tel: 800-462-6420; Tel: 717-794-3800; Fax: 800-338-4550; Fax: 717-794-3803; e-mail: custserv@rowman.com; Web site: http://rowman.com/Page/Journals

URL:  https://rowman.com/page/IJER

Journal Code:  NOV2012

Entry Date:  2012

Accession Number:  EJ984634

Database:  ERIC

Article:

“Pell Grants: Where Does All the Money Go”

Author(s):  Robinson, Jenna Ashley ; Cheston, Duke

Source:  John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. 20 pp.

Peer Reviewed:  N/A

Publication Date:  2012

Descriptors:

Student Financial Aid, Grants, Income, Federal Aid, Resource Allocation, Federal Programs, College Students, Access to Education, Cost Effectiveness, Student Needs, Student Characteristics, Eligibility, Paying for College, Parent Financial Contribution, Academic Achievement, Grade Point Average, Graduation, Standardized Tests, Low Income Groups, Educational Attainment, Socioeconomic Status, Costs, Higher Education

Abstract:

The Federal Pell Grant Program, which provides need-based grants to millions of college students, is the federal government’s largest education expenditure. It consumes over half the Department of Education’s annual budget and in 2010-2011 cost taxpayers about $36 billion per year. Although the program started out as a way to provide college access to low-income students, it has grown so vast in recent years that nearly 60 percent of all undergraduates now receive Pell grants. In spite of the high cost, few people have scrutinized the effectiveness of Pell grants. This report, “Pell Grants: Where Does All the Money Go?” by Jenna Ashley Robinson and Duke Cheston, brings together what is known about Pell grants to determine how well the program serves the students who receive them and the taxpayers who fund them. Calculating Pell Grant Eligibility is appended. (Contains 39 resources.)

Abstractor:  As Provided

Corporate Source:  John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy

Number of Pages:  20

Publication Type:  Reports – Descriptive

Availability:

Full Text from ERIC Available online: http://www.eric.ed.gov.mutex.gmu.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED535450
John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. 353 East Six Forks Road Suite 150, Raleigh, NC 27609. Tel: 919-828-1400; Fax: 919-828-7455; e-mail: info@popecenter.org; Web site: http://www.popecenter.org

Journal Code:  OCT2012

Entry Date:  2012

Accession Number:  ED535450

Database:  ERIC

Article:

“A STUDY OF HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT PREVENTION AND AT-RISK NINTH GRADERS’ ROLE MODELS AND MOTIVATIONS  FOR SCHOOL COMPLETION”

Author(s): Somers, Cheryl L.; Owens, Delila; Piliawsky, Monte

Source: Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan

Abstract:

This study describes the results of a research evaluation of a school dropout prevention program and adolescents’ self-reported perceptions of their motivations and role models. The program was a partnership between an urban university and an urban school district that was designed to prevent 9th grade students from dropping out of high school. It included tutoring, personal development, summer enrichment, and parental involvement. The specific research goals were 1) to evaluate whether this approach to intervention with these urban, at-risk teens was effective in changing educational attitudes and behaviors, as well as school grades, and 2) to examine these teens’ career goals and role models. The participants were 140 ninth grade, male and female, primarily African-American, low income, public high school students in a major urban city in the Midwest (n=75 experimental group; n=65 comparison group). Findings were mixed. Results are discussed in several contexts, including the role of school transitions, especially the adjustment required when moving into high school.

Abstractor:  As Provided

Number of Pages: 8 (348-356)

Publication Type: Journal Article

Copyright of Education is the property of Project Innovation, Inc.

Article (Works Cited Format):

“A Review of Barries, Reserach, and Strategies.” Review. The CollegeKeys Compact (2011): 4-31. CollegeBoard Advocacy & Policy Center. Web. 19 Feb. 2013.

Article (Works Cited Format):

Goldman Sachs Foundation. Opening Doors and Paving the Way: Increasing College Access and Success for Talented Low-Income Students. White Paper. Comp. Dr. Jason R. Klugman and Donnell Butler. Princeton: Princeton Univesrity Preparatory Program/Goldman Sachs Foundation, 2009. Print.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s