It seems everyone is into drinking bottled water – and for good reason! Bottled water is not only convenient, it’s a natural thirst quencher and a cost-effective alternative to sugary drinks.

Another thing you should know is that bottled water is strictly regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to help ensure it’s safe for your family and employees.

Two great brands for delivery are:

Nestle Pure Life from $20.97 a month for three 5-gallon bottles, dispenser and no contact.

Ozarka from $26.97 a month for three 5-gallon bottles, dispenser and no contact.

Edwards West Oaks Stadium 14 & RPX
1000 West Oaks Mall
Houston, Texas 77082
281-496-2361

Come join us for a “sneak peak” into our new Houston location at a wonderful price and give back to your community at the same time. From August 20 through August 22, enjoy $2 movie tickets, $2 soft drinks and $2 popcorn, with all of the proceeds benefitting the local charities listed below.  Each day will have slightly different slate of movies, combining some recently released films with several themed movies to fit the occasion.  We look forward to seeing you!

Charity Preview Flyer

Monday, August 20 “Read It and See It at Edwards”

benefiting Readers are Leaders Foundation

Alice In Wonderland [PG]  12:10  2:50  6:40   9:20
Harry Potter: Deathly Hallows Pt 2 [PG13]  1:10  4:10  7:15  10:15
The Help  [PG13]  12:40  3:55  7:10  10:25

Tuesday, August 21  “Edwards Family Fun Day”
benefiting Big Brothers Big Sisters of Greater Houston
DreamWorks Animation’s Madagascar 2 [PG]  2:05  4:30  7:10  9:45
The Muppets [PG]  12:10  2:50  6:40  9:20
The Smurfs [PG]  2:15  4:45  7:15  9:55

Wednesday, August 22 “Edwards Salutes the Troops”
benefiting The American Red Cross

Act of Valor         [R]                    12:10  2:50  6:40  9:20
Dear John         [PG13]                     1:40  4:40  7:15  9:50
Marvel Studios’ Iron Man 2  [PG13]           1:10  4:10  7:10  10:05

Additional films showing each day benefitting the same local charities
21 Jump Street  [R]  12:45  3:25  6:30  9:10
Battleship    [PG13]  1:20  4:20  7:20  10:20
Dark Shadows  [PG13]  12:35  3:20  6:50  9:30
Hunger Games  [PG13]  12:00  3:10  6:20  9:35
Mirror Mirror  [PG]  12:55  3:35  6:10  8:50
The Lucky One  [PG13]  12:15  3:15  5:45  8:15  10:45
The Vow [PG13]  12:30  3:00  5:30  8:00  10:40
Think Like a Man  [PG13]  2:00  4:50  7:40  10:30
Titanic 3D  [PG13]  12:20  4:25  8:40
Alvin & The Chipmunks:Chipwrecked  [G] 1:30  3:45  6:00  8:30
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol in RPX  [PG13] 1:00  4:00  7:00 10:00

The state’s test vendor has fired back at research from a University of Texas at Austin professor that calls into question the method it uses to develop Texas standardized exams, saying that his claims lack factual evidence.

Denny Way, the senior vice president for measurement services at Pearson, said the company welcomed a “very broad and open dialogue” about the role of standardized testing in evaluating students and schools. But he said that should take place based on well-founded research, not professor Walter Stroup’s “wild conclusions,” which he said would not stand up to the review of outside experts.

The Texas Education Agency also issued a statement defending the standardized exams the state uses to evaluate school districts for accountability purposes. It said that both the STAAR, which ninth-grade students began taking this past school year, and the TAKS, which the state has used since 2003, are “are designed and administered in a transparent and highly scrutinized process” that involves hundreds of Texas educators and a committee of national experts in educational research and assessment, and “routinely undergo” reviews for technical quality.

“TAKS and STAAR were soundly designed to measure Texas state content standards,” according to the statement from the agency.

Stroup’s analyses, which he conducted with two other UT-Austin researchers, question how Pearson applies “item response theory,” a widely accepted method of devising standardized exams, to create the state’s TAKS exams. Using that method, he said, test developers select questions based on a model that correlates students’ ability with the probability that they will get a question right.

His research shows that when used in that way to create large-scale standardized tests, Stroup said, IRT produces an exam that is more sensitive to how it ranks students based on that model than to measuring any gains in their year-year learning.

Since news reports came out about the research last week, Stroup said that the dissertation on which his claims are based has been downloaded close to 1,000 times by academics across various research fields.  He said he no one has pointed out a flaw that overturned any of the research’s central conclusions.

The findings — which he presented at a June meeting of the House Public Education Committee and is preparing to submit to research journals — suggest that because of the way the exams are developed, they cannot properly measure the effects of instruction in the classroom.

Way, who also released a statement on the company’s website, said Stroup’s work reflected confusion about how the test development process operates.

“I think you can ask questions from a public policy standpoint,” Way said. “But those are separate from saying that the test is flawed or there’s a defect in the machinery, that the item response theory is wrong.”

He said the claim that a previous year’s test scores are a better predictor of students’ results the next year than their performance in the classroom, which Stroup said indicates that the tests cannot reflect what they learned over the school year, did not hold up. Any correlation between students’ scores probably reflected the fact that students are retaining what they’ve learned and building on that knowledge, he said.

The research has generated much discussion among assessment experts, many of whom have underscored the importance of moving the studies through the peer review process so that they can be properly vetted.

Stroup said he initially delayed preparing the findings for academics journals, which can take a year before publishing an article, because of assurances that the STAAR exams would address the issues his research pointed to in the TAKS. When it became clear that the same technique was used to develop the new assessment system, he felt the need to press ahead.

He said he regretted the fact that his work had not yet been published had distracted from an examination of its technical merit, but that he remained confident about its conclusions.

Response to Stroup’s claims has also focused on what Howard Everson, a former test developer and education professor at the City University of New York, said was a common misunderstanding among educators and policymakers about what large-scale, statewide accountability exams are intended to do.

“We design assessments to fit a very specific, clearly defined need. In the case of the accountability test, it is defined broadly to benchmark how schools and school districts in the state are doing from year to year,” said Everson, who has served as the vice president for research at the College Board, which produces the SAT and other admissions tests.

Because statewide accountability exams are created to compare school districts across the board, he said, they aren’t a good measure of how well specific instructional practices or curriculum programs are working within a single district.

“Typically they aren’t that sensitive to instruction because the instruction varies from school district to school district,” he said.

The purpose of the exams is to provide a level way to compare districts’ performance, he said, and they shouldn’t be used to evaluate individual, district-specific programs. But that doesn’t mean there is a flaw in the method they are put together, as Stroup’s research implies, he said.

“We always caution that you may not be able to make the kind of inferences you want to make from those scores,” said Everson, who said that although he’s familiar with Stroup’s claims, he had not yet read the dissertation that sets forth his reasoning.

That warning can get lost as school officials and lawmakers turn to state assessment results as the simplest way to evaluate the quality of educational programs, Everson said. ”It’s an unfortunate fact that policymakers have to make decisions in real time, and they use whatever evidence is available, and oftentimes the evidence isn’t really good for the use that they want to put it to,” he said.

Stroup said that the conversation the research had generated, including Pearson’s response, made the need for a public hearing even more pressing. If the tests do not sufficiently measure the quality of instruction or other factors in the classroom, as he said his research shows, he said the vendor should justify their use in the state’s accountability system.

He said legislators should press the test developers to prove why they know that it is prior learning and “not a test-taking construct” that produces the similarity between scores.

“In the end, however it should be the vendor’s responsibility,” he said. “And the vendor should have to do this in a public forum, not just somewhere at TEA.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/P0F5Yr.

• Abbey Residential www.abbeyresidential.com
  Six apartment complexes in the Greater Houston area.
  Half-off administrative fee (normally $150) and no application fee (normally $50).
• Camden Living  www.camdenliving.com
  Many locations in the Greater Houston area.
  Waived application, administrative fee, pet security deposit, termination or transfer fee if transferred.
• Park @ Voss  www.parkatvoss.com
  2424 S Voss Rd, Houston TX 77057
  Phone: (713) 268-3000
  7% off market rate.
• Parc Towne Plaza Apartments
  13455 Woodforest Blvd, Houston TX 77015
  Phone: (713) 455-6602
  7% off regular rent
• Riverwalk Apartments
  450 Normandy (77015)
  713-451-1511
• The Crest Apartments
  2300 Wilcrest, Houston TX 77042
  Phone: (713) 781-8181
  $15 monthly discount
• Whispering Winds Apartments
  2902 Whispering Winds Dr., Pearland (77581)
  281-997-1733
  5% off monthly rental rate
• Equinox
  2950 Old Spanish Trail (77054)
  713-747-7478
  We offer a 3% discount to all HISD employees. We waive application fees and deposits, as well. Please see our Web site at www.equinoxhouston.com.

If you’re new around here, you may not be aware of this awesome opportunity to snatch up a free pair of glasses (including 1.5 single vision index lenses) from Coastal.com.

Here’s what you need to do to snag your free glasses…

• Head over to Coastal.com and pick out your favorite frames.
• Enter your prescription
• Enter the promo code at checkout (keep in mind that this promo code is for new customers only!)
• Head to checkout where you’ll need to pay shipping and handling charges and the costs for any lens upgrades

Fine Print: This promo is for first time Coastal.com glasses customers only; One free pair of glasses per customer; Certain frames are NOT eligible for the promotion (if you see a “Coupons not applicable” message on a pair of frames, then it is excluded from the promotion);1.5 index lenses included for free; lens upgrades including higher index lenses, progressives, Transitions, polarized and all lens coatings are available at an additional cost; shipping and handling costs apply; cannot be combined with any other offers; valid for residents of the USA only

Keep an eye out in the Target ad for a coupon that provides a Target gift card, the deal is different each time, sometimes it requires a transfer, sometimes it includes new prescriptions. The amount of the gift card ranges I personally have seen $5-$25. I have not seen the Target deal in over three months but it should come back soon, it came and went every couple months in the last couple years I know of.

Finally keep an eye out other pharmacies in your neighborhood, both local and national chains. You never know when they might offer a deal worth switching for. Especially now with Express Scripts members no longer being able to use Walgreens. Everyone is competing for that business.

*To receive $25 free groceries a prescription must be transferred and purchased. Offer expires 3/20/12. Government funded prescriptions not included. Not valid on prescriptions transferred from another Kroger owned pharmacy or with any other
offer. Prescriptions reimbursable under state or federal government programs not eligible. Not valid where prohibited by law. Subject to applicable taxes. Additional restrictions and limits apply. See pharmacy for details. Offer not redeemable for purchases of alcohol,
tobacco, gift cards, offi ce services, prescriptions, or any other items prohibited by law. Offer available for limited time only.

The second deal available is from Randalls is also $25 off a transferred prescription, but it is a reward coupon that must be used in a single visit off a $50 purchase by April 14th. One of the restrictions are no milk, which I think is a little restrictive.

 *Transfer a prescription to our pharmacy and get a $25 off coupon for your next grocery shopping at Randalls valid when you spend $50 or more in qualified purchases in a single transaction with your Randalls Remarkable Card (calculated after deduction of card savings, store coupons, and all other offers, coupons, discounts and savings and not including the excluded purchases below) between 01/04/12 and 03/31/12. Qualified purchases exclude purchases of: Beer, Wine, Spirits, Tobacco Products, Fuel, All Fluid Items in the Refrigerated Dairy Section (including Fluid Dairy and Dairy Substitutes), Prescription Items and Co-payments, Bus/Commuter Passes, Fishing/Hunting Licenses and Tags, Postage Stamps, Money Orders, Money Transfers, Ski Tickets, Amusement Park Tickets, Event Tickets, Lottery Tickets, Phone Cards, Gift Cards, and Gift Certificates; also excludes: Bottle Deposits and Sales Tax. Limit two (2) coupons per household. Coupon is valid on your next grocery purchase of $50 or more and is subject to additional terms and conditions. You pay sales tax on purchases made with coupon. Coupon must be presented at the time of purchase and cannot be combined with any other savings, coupon, discount or offer. No reproductions will be accepted. Coupon has no cash value and expires 04/14/12. Void where prohibited by law. We reserve the right to correct typographical, pictorial and other ad errors. Online and in-store prices, discounts, and offers may differ.

**Offer is not valid for prescriptions paid in whole or in part by government or private programs that restrict participation in such incentive plans (e.g., Medicaid, Medicare, Tricare). Other restrictions and exclusions apply, see Pharmacy for details.

One consequence of lawmakers’ $5.4 billion cut to Texas public schools? Five school finance lawsuits filed against the state, covering more than 500 districts and 3 million students.

With the latest suit, filed Feb. 24 by a group called Texans for Real Efficiency and Equity in Education, comes a twist: The plaintiffs aren’t school districts, but parents who support charter schools, bringing a new voice into courtrooms that until now have been populated with veterans of past school finance battles. Instead of challenging the state on whether it has given enough money to schools — a component of the four other lawsuits — it questions how that money is being spent.

We’ve updated our guide to keeping all the lawsuits and issues straight. (Download all of the available pleadings in the lawsuit and the state’s response, to the left.)

Note: Many of the lawsuits will combine several arguments. We’ve categorized them above based on their primary focus. We’ll continue to update this with new developments. 

Note: Many of the lawsuits will combine several arguments. We’ve categorized them above based on their primary focus. We’ll continue to update this with new developments.
The newest lawsuit, dubbed “Waiting for Superman,” won’t affect the timeline or the strategy behind the other litigation, said David Thompson, an attorney representing school districts in one of the suits. Once at trial, a judge will likely require the groups making the same arguments to consolidate, meaning they’ll likely share some experts and discovery costs.

Historically, districts have sued the state on three different grounds: efficiency, adequacy and what’s called “meaningful discretion.” The Texas Constitution requires that the state provide efficient and adequate funding for public schools. It also says that school districts must have the ability to choose how they spend money they bring in from property taxes.

The latest lawsuit aligns with the previous four on the property tax argument — that the state, by continuing to leave much of the responsibility for funding schools up to local authorities, has left them no choice but to raise property taxes. In many cases, school districts must levy the maximum taxes allowed under the law to meet minimum educational standards, leading to what the lawsuit alleges is effectively a statewide property tax.

But it diverges from the other four on a key point: It does not argue that public schools need more money to meet state standards. In addition to the property tax argument, all four of the other suits claim that the state has failed to adequately fund its public schools well enough to meet increasingly rigorous accountability standards. The TREE pleading leaves that question open, saying that more funding “may or may not” lead to more efficient public schools.

The lawsuit, which has the support of former Republican state Rep. Kent Grusendorf (a past House public education chairman who was defeated in 2006 after supporting public school vouchers) and former Republican Supreme Court Justice Craig Enoch, offers some suggestions as to how the state might curtail what TREE attorney Chris Diamond pointed out that previous court rulings have called the “gross bureaucratic waste” in the system — including increasing competition. The suit suggests the state should lift the cap on the number of charter schools it allows, and that traditional school districts should operate under the same regulatory burden as charters, which are exempt from certain state requirements like minimum employee salaries, class size and enrollment. It says it should be easier for students to transfer from district to district if they wish, and calls for an independent third party to evaluate the efficiency of the public school system.

Now for a quick review of the interests behind the other four suits. Chapter 41 schools, the property-wealthy schools that give local revenue back to the state under Robin Hood laws, are joining together as the Texas School Coalition and suing the state, primarily to ensure that they don’t end up handing over even more money.

A broader coalition of schools led by Thompson will attack on both the adequacy and property tax fronts.

The two remaining lawsuits represent the interests of poorer districts. They both attack the “target revenue” system established in 2006, when lawmakers reduced the property tax rate but promised school districts that the state would give them enough money to maintain their revenue. Because of that measure, some school districts receive a lot of money from the state to make up the difference, while others receive far less. That has resulted in a funding scheme in which neighboring school districts can have as much as a $7,000 difference in state spending per student.

A group known as the Texas Taxpayer and Student Fairness Coalition is suing on behalf of suburban, rural and inner-city schools of varying sizes, arguing that the target revenue system is wildly inefficient and unfair. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund argues in its lawsuit that the target revenue system disproportionately hurts school districts that serve large contingents of low-income and English-language-learning students.

Until now, all the plaintiffs agreed that the current level of state funding was inadequate. It’s hard to say whether this latest suit will affect the likelihood of a favorable ruling on that point. But it does present some new possible remedies — some of which could have a wide-ranging impact on Texas public schools.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/tujbbi.

A gift card valued at $20 for $15, what a deal!

There are so many companies that buy and sell gift cards, but one of the companies that I have used is Plastic Jungle. They sell both physical cards and electronic gift cards that can be printed and redeemed the same as the physical cards. And fully guarantee purchases and are backed with satisfaction guarantee.