Welcome to the Gutenberg Editor

Of Mountains & Printing Presses

The goal of this new editor is to make adding rich content to WordPress simple and enjoyable. This whole post is composed of pieces of content—somewhat similar to LEGO bricks—that you can move around and interact with. Move your cursor around and you’ll notice the different blocks light up with outlines and arrows. Press the arrows to reposition blocks quickly, without fearing about losing things in the process of copying and pasting.

What you are reading now is a text block the most basic block of all. The text block has its own controls to be moved freely around the post…

… like this one, which is right aligned.

Headings are separate blocks as well, which helps with the outline and organization of your content.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

Handling images and media with the utmost care is a primary focus of the new editor. Hopefully, you’ll find aspects of adding captions or going full-width with your pictures much easier and robust than before.

If your theme supports it, you’ll see the “wide” button on the image toolbar. Give it a try.

Try selecting and removing or editing the caption, now you don’t have to be careful about selecting the image or other text by mistake and ruining the presentation.

The Inserter Tool

Imagine everything that WordPress can do is available to you quickly and in the same place on the interface. No need to figure out HTML tags, classes, or remember complicated shortcode syntax. That’s the spirit behind the inserter—the (+) button you’ll see around the editor—which allows you to browse all available content blocks and add them into your post. Plugins and themes are able to register their own, opening up all sort of possibilities for rich editing and publishing.

Go give it a try, you may discover things WordPress can already add into your posts that you didn’t know about. Here’s a short list of what you can currently find there:

• Text & Headings
• Images & Videos
• Galleries
• Embeds, like YouTube, Tweets, or other WordPress posts.
• Layout blocks, like Buttons, Hero Images, Separators, etc.
• And Lists like this one of course 🙂

---

Visual Editing

A huge benefit of blocks is that you can edit them in place and manipulate your content directly. Instead of having fields for editing things like the source of a quote, or the text of a button, you can directly change the content. Try editing the following quote:

The editor will endeavor to create a new page and post building experience that makes writing rich posts effortless, and has “blocks” to make it easy what today might take shortcodes, custom HTML, or “mystery meat” embed discovery.

Matt Mullenweg, 2017

The information corresponding to the source of the quote is a separate text field, similar to captions under images, so the structure of the quote is protected even if you select, modify, or remove the source. It’s always easy to add it back.

Blocks can be anything you need. For instance, you may want to add a subdued quote as part of the composition of your text, or you may prefer to display a giant stylized one. All of these options are available in the inserter.

• 

• 

• 

You can change the amount of columns in your galleries by dragging a slider in the block inspector in the sidebar.

Media Rich

If you combine the new wide and full-wide alignments with galleries, you can create a very media rich layout, very quickly:

Sure, the full-wide image can be pretty big. But sometimes the image is worth it.

• 

• 

The above is a gallery with just two images. It’s an easier way to create visually appealing layouts, without having to deal with floats. You can also easily convert the gallery back to individual images again, by using the block switcher.

Any block can opt into these alignments. The embed block has them also, and is responsive out of the box:

You can build any block you like, static or dynamic, decorative or plain. Here’s a pullquote block:

Code is Poetry

The WordPress community

If you want to learn more about how to build additional blocks, or if you are interested in helping with the project, head over to the GitHub repository.

Help build Gutenberg

---

Thanks for testing Gutenberg!

2004 SAT Scores by Race and State

 

• SAT Score for actual Whites is 162 points higher than reported by the College Board.

• What they report as a 202 point gap between blacks and Whites is actually a 424 point gap between White men and black women.

• States which are mostly Whites score 100 to 153 points higher than the “national average” for Whites.

• Whites in Iowa score 236 SAT Math points higher than “whites” in New York.

 

Based on the racial composition of Iowa, the highest scoring  state with an SAT score of 1195, New York, one of the lowest scoring states at 1007, and Washington, DC, ground zero in intellectual achievement on EVERY test imaginable at 965, and the SAT scores reported by race, we should see scores of 1052, 1003, and 934 respectively.  This means that Iowa’s actual score was 134 points higher than its racial composition  would suggest it should be, New York’s was 4 points higher, and DC’s was 31  points higher.

 

 

 

	Iowa	Rhode Island
% Catholic	11%	45%
% Protestant	89%	55%
Whites SAT Math	613	533
Whites SAT Verbal	592	512
A = SAT Score Catholics
B = SAT score Protestants
Math
Iowa	0.11 * A + 0.89 * B = 613
RI	0.45 * A + 0.55 * B = 533
	A = (613 – .89B)/.11
	0.45 * (613 – .89B)/0.11 +.55B = 533
	2,507.72 – 3.641B + .55B = 533
	3.091B = 1,974.72
	B = 638.9
	A = (613 – .89 * 638.9)/.11 = 403.4
Verbal
Iowa	0.11 * A + 0.89 * B = 592
RI	0.45 * A + 0.55 * B = 512
	A = (592 – .89B)/.11
	0.45 * (592 – .89B)/0.11 +.55B = 512
	2,421.8 – 3.641B + .55B = 512
	3.091B = 1,909.8
	B = 617.9
	A = (592 – .89 * 617.9)/.11 = 382.8
	Math	Verbal	Difference
Protestants	639	618
Catholics	403	383
	236	235	471

 

 

 

In other words, if the SAT scores provided by the College Board for SAT scores by each race are correct, we would expect Iowa to score 1048 rather than 1195, we would expect New York to score 1003 rather than 1007, and we would expect DC to score 934 rather than 965.

 

	Indian	Asian	black	Mexican	Puerto Rican	Hispanic	White	jew	Mamzer	Pre dicted	Actual	Diff
SAT Score	971	1084	857	909	909	926	1059	860	1002
Iowa	0.40%	1.60%	2.5%			3.80%	91%	0%	1%
N.Y.	0.50%	6.90%	17.4%			16.30%	57%	0%	1.50%			100%
D.C.	0.4%	3.2%	56.5%	0%	0%	8.20%	30.3%	0.%	1.40%			100%
Iowa	3.9	17.3	21.4	0.0	0.0	35.2	960.5	0.0	10.0	1048	1195	-147
N.Y.	4.9	74.8	149.1	0.0	0.0	150.9	607.9	0.0	15.0	1003	1007	-4
D.C.	3.9	34.7	484.2	0.0	0.0	75.9	320.9	0.0	14.0	934	965	-31

 

 

If all else is equal except the score of Whites, then the SAT  score for Whites in Iowa must be 1221 [162 points higher than the national average for Whites], the SAT score for Whites in N.Y. must be 1067 [8 points higher], and  the SAT scores for Whites in DC must be 1163 [104 points higher than the national average].

And the SAT score for actual Whites in the nation must be 1221 rather than the 1059 reported by the College Board, which means they misrepresent White intellectual talent by 162 points, and that the gap between Whites and blacks is 364 points rather than 202 points.

How can it be, though, that the White Race in Iowa scores 154 points higher than the White Race in New York, 58 points higher than the White Race in DC, and 162 points higher than the score for Whites reported  by the College Board?  How can this be rationalized or explained?

Because Whites are a majority in Iowa, their scores must be higher than Iowa’s average of 1195. Because blacks are now only 56% of the population of DC and Whites are  38.4%, it’s not completely unexpected that the average score for DC of 965 is 108  points higher than the average score for blacks of 857.  It’s revealing, though, that blacks in the “state” which spends more per capita for “education” than any other part of the globe [five times as much per student as Iowa], and have the absolutely highest per capita incomes for blacks  anywhere in the world, and have more police protection and more different forms  of police and have the world’s toughest gun control and drug war laws than most  dictators, would score LOWER than Mozambique.  But this is what  international tests like IAEP have shown.

The answer is jews.

Because jews demanded in the 1960’s that they not be counted as a separate race, we don’t know the exact population of jews in either DC or New York. Because Whites are only 91% and Asians are only 1.6% of Iowa’s population, if Whites there score 1221, then Iowa’s calculated score is exactly 1195.  But in order to explain the very low score of DC where blacks are only 56.5% of the population, we must assume that at least 4.5% of the population there are jews who score closer to their brethren in Israel than to any local populations.

Viola.  That fits the equation perfectly, giving DC a calculated score of exactly 965, exactly as reported by the SAT.

If that’s not the case [if there are no jews who participate in SAT in DC], then the only way to explain why DC’s actual score is 18 points lower than predicted is that the score of blacks in DC is only 826, which is 31 points lower than the national average for blacks.  IAEP suggests that’s possible.

But what about this whopping 154 point difference between Whites in Iowa and “whites” [note lower case ‘w’] in New York?

blog

Thx

Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong by a MacArthur genius

Author: Haim

Subject: Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/everything-you-know-about-education-is-wrong/249722/

Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong
By Jordan Weissmann
Dec 9 2011, 8:40 AM ET90

A groundbreaking study of New York schools by a MacArthur "genius" challenges the typical understanding of what makes a good school

Think of the ingredients that make for a good school. Small classes. Well-educated teachers. Plenty of funding. Combine, mix well, then bake.

Turns out, your recipe would be horribly wrong, at least according to a new working paper out of Harvard. Its take away: Schools shouldn’t focus on resources. They should focus on culture.

The study comes courtesy of economist Roland Fryer, an academic heavyweight who was handed a MacArthur Foundation "genius award" earlier this year for his research into the driving forces behind student achievement. Fryer gathered extensive data from 35 New York City charter schools, which generally cater to underprivileged and minority communities. He interviewed students, principals, and teachers, reviewing lesson plans and watching classroom video, to try and pinpoint factors that correlated with higher test scores.

His findings could add some new fire to the debate about what makes a good school. Fryer found that class size, per-pupil spending, and the number of teachers with certifications or advanced degrees had nothing to do with student test scores in language and math.

In fact, schools that poured in more resources actually got worse results.

What did make a difference? The study measures correlation, not causation, so there are no clear answers. But there is a clear pattern. Schools that focused on teacher development, data-driven instruction, creating a culture focused on student achievement, and setting high academic expectations consistently fared better. The results were consistent whether the charter’s program was geared towards the creative arts or hard-core behavioral discipline.

IT’S THE CULTURE, STUPID

If small classes, credentialed teachers, and plush budgets aren’t adding up to successful students, then what is? Fryer measured school culture in a way no academic before him had. He looked at the number of times teachers got feedback. The number of days students got tutored in small groups. The number of assessments for students. The number of hours students actually spent at their desks. Each correlated with higher student scores.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, schools that claimed a "relentless focus on academic goals" also tended to produce better test scores. Schools that focused on self esteem and emotional health? Not as much. (Sorry Gen Y.)

The findings all get summed up in a group of handy tables. First, here are the ingredients you think of as being important to a school — what Fryer calls "traditional" resource-based inputs. Most of those factors don’t have a statistically significant relationship to school performance. Some actually have a negative effect.

Then Fryer compared less traditional cultural factors to student performance. Teacher feedback and instruction time had the strongest connection. In sum, these six factors explained about 50% of the variations between charter school outcomes.

There’s an obvious caveat to all this. It’s easier for schools to offer intensive tutoring, extra classroom time, and teacher coaching when there’s enough money to go around. Otherwise, you’re schooling model becomes: "do more with less." But Fryer’s findings show that money alone isn’t enough. Neither are sterling teaching credentials. It’s what you do with them that makes a difference for students.

> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:36:18 -0500
> From: watch@mathforum.org
> To: jk@israeliteknight.com
> Subject: Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong
>
> — DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE —
>
> A message has been posted by the user "hpipik@netzero.com", who
> you are watching.
>
> Author: Haim
> Subject: Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/everything-you-know-about-education-is-wrong/249722/
>
> Everything You Know About Education Is Wrong
> By Jordan Weissmann
> Dec 9 2011, 8:40 AM ET90
>
>
> A groundbreaking study of New York schools by a MacArthur "genius" challenges the typical understanding of what makes a good school
>
>
> Think of the ingredients that make for a good school. Small classes. Well-educated teachers. Plenty of funding. Combine, mix well, then bake.
>
> Turns out, your recipe would be horribly wrong, at least according to a new working paper out of Harvard. Its take away: Schools shouldn’t focus on resources. They should focus on culture.
>
> The study comes courtesy of economist Roland Fryer, an academic heavyweight who was handed a MacArthur Foundation "genius award" earlier this year for his research into the driving forces behind student achievement. Fryer gathered extensive data from 35 New York City charter schools, which generally cater to underprivileged and minority communities. He interviewed students, principals, and teachers, reviewing lesson plans and watching classroom video, to try and pinpoint factors that correlated with higher test scores.
>
> His findings could add some new fire to the debate about what makes a good school. Fryer found that class size, per-pupil spending, and the number of teachers with certifications or advanced degrees had nothing to do with student test scores in language and math.
>
>
> In fact, schools that poured in more resources actually got worse results.
>
> What did make a difference? The study measures correlation, not causation, so there are no clear answers. But there is a clear pattern. Schools that focused on teacher development, data-driven instruction, creating a culture focused on student achievement, and setting high academic expectations consistently fared better. The results were consistent whether the charter’s program was geared towards the creative arts or hard-core behavioral discipline.
>
>
> IT’S THE CULTURE, STUPID
>
>
> If small classes, credentialed teachers, and plush budgets aren’t adding up to successful students, then what is? Fryer measured school culture in a way no academic before him had. He looked at the number of times teachers got feedback. The number of days students got tutored in small groups. The number of assessments for students. The number of hours students actually spent at their desks. Each correlated with higher student scores.
>
>
>
> Perhaps unsurprisingly, schools that claimed a "relentless focus on academic goals" also tended to produce better test scores. Schools that focused on self esteem and emotional health? Not as much. (Sorry Gen Y.)
>
> The findings all get summed up in a group of handy tables. First, here are the ingredients you think of as being important to a school — what Fryer calls "traditional" resource-based inputs. Most of those factors don’t have a statistically significant relationship to school performance. Some actually have a negative effect.
>
>
>
> Then Fryer compared less traditional cultural factors to student performance. Teacher feedback and instruction time had the strongest connection. In sum, these six factors explained about 50% of the variations between charter school outcomes.
>
>
>
>
> There’s an obvious caveat to all this. It’s easier for schools to offer intensive tutoring, extra classroom time, and teacher coaching when there’s enough money to go around. Otherwise, you’re schooling model becomes: "do more with less." But Fryer’s findings show that money alone isn’t enough. Neither are sterling teaching credentials. It’s what you do with them that makes a difference for students.
>
>
> To view and reply to the message please see:
>
> http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=7629118
>
> To view the discussion, see:
> http://mathforum.org/kb/forum.jspa?forumID=206
>
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> <><><><>
> The Math Forum respects your online time and Internet privacy. To view
> or cancel your discussion watches, please log back in to the discussions
> with your israeliteknight username and click the "delete" checkboxes at
>
> http://mathforum.org/kb/editwatches!default.jspa
>
> — DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE —

Satisfying girls is easy

Try natural way to power your potence http://emigrant.firstorganicmart.eu/

Win your lady’s attention

Secrets of better love life http://alphabetically.homeherbmart.eu/

Unleash your carnal desires

http://overcompensate.ugmpnctc.com/ The greatest method to please your gf

Feel the bottomless enjoyment tonight

Increase your reputation of first-rate lover http://digression.zvbvldhj.ru/

Do you wish to gratify your loved one every night?

http://silicon.yourwelnessvalue.ru/ Some steps to masculine strength

Are you ready to gratify your beloved one this night?

http://cartography.zvbvldhj.ru/ The best night of satisfaction