I earlier posted a picture from a project I was working on for journaling media usage. Below is the book I got back from POD (I used Lulu and am quite satisfied). I still have a few changes I want to make before I consider it “finalized”: increasing the gutter size (the gutter calculator is clearly configured for reading, not writing), optimizing the half-tones and gradients (I printed a test scale in the back of the book), and redoing the cover (I don’t think I had the DPI set properly for the only rasterized image I used in the entire project).

Also, after reading this piece by Kelli Anderson on documenting work, I’m trying to take better project and process photos. I took these photos on my porch, in 20° weather—but the natural sunlight made it worth it.

One of my AmeriCorps members asked for resources on technology needs-assessment surveys and I came across some varied approaches. Above is from the US Department of Education hosted An Educator’s Guide to Evaluating the Use of Technology in Schools and Classrooms. Below is from the National Center for Technology Planning’s “ Perceived Educational Technology Needs Survey” [PDF] (the Center appears to be more a guy then a center). Both appear rather aged, though I like the latter one better.

Note to the respondent: Please keep this questionnaire in your possession for the survey interval in your usual work location while performing your customary duties. Make entries to the items as appropriate responses occur to you. Your responses will help inform the technology planning process about the best application of technologies in your teaching situation.

1. Do you ever, or often, think, “there must be an easier way to do this?” If so, please list and describe as many of the things or situations as you can to which this statement would apply:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5. [Note: All of the following questions repeat this format, but the phrase “If so, please list and describe as many of the things or situations as you can to which this statement would apply: #1-5” is omitted for brevity ]

1. Do you ever, or often, think, “I could do this faster if only…”
2. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish I had a helper to help me do…”
3. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish I had a computer or other device so I could…”
4. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish I or my students could contact someone right now to tell them…”
5. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish I or my students could contact someone right now to find out…”
6. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish my students had improved computers or other technological resources available so they could…”
7. Do you ever, or often, think, “I wish my students had more computers or other technological resources available so they could…”

Please use the space below to state in your own words any suggestions, recommendations, or concerns you have for the use of computers, networks, or other advanced technologies for your work or for your students, your school, or the school district. Thank you for providing this information.

I am very impressed with how Marcus du Sautoy’s The Number Mysteries integrates hyperlinks into the book using URL shorteners and QR codes (above). Contrast that with Dan Cederholm’s Handcrafted CSS _(which is still an excellent book). _The latter was published August 2009, the former August 2010.

My former-roommate Alex (the guy in the middle) is spending his winter vacation in Mexico volunteering with One Small House. I donated to the project and they’ve been awesome in thanking me. > During the week of December 26-31, 2010, a group of volunteers from the United States will work with the community of Lazaro Cardenas to build them a new, free health clinic. Currently, this small community is receiving its health services from a trailer that is inadequate to handle their needs. With the support of donations, One Small House and its volunteers will help ensure that this community receives the quality health care it needs.

An Island 94 commenter requested a t-shirt based on the Boston Subway Map I vectorized a while ago. So I set up an at-cost shop through Spreadshirt, and ordered one myself.

This is a set of images from a self-journaling project I’m working on based around my media-consumption habits. A few months ago I designed a self-journaling worksheet for Angelina, and she really liked the use of a blank face for the critical-reflection process—so that’s one part of it. I just sent off Version 0 to be printed; I’ll post some photos when it arrives.

Boston’s Metro newspaper ran a page 2 article on the Boston Bike Crash Map the Boston Cyclists Union and I created. Also in the news:

• In the Boston Globe Blog’s “The Angle”:

This is a stunning example of what a non-profit can do with government statistics, Google Maps, and a very dedicated volunteer.

• On WBUR Radio:

Among other concentrations, it shows a dark line of bruised elbows, broken fenders, and worse stretching from the Back Bay to Allston along Commonwealth Avenue, right past our studios at WBUR.

• And Universal Hub.

The New York Times yesterday gave a breakdown of proposals to change how donors calculate donations in their taxes:

All three deficit reduction proposals from the blue ribbon panels would eliminate the deduction in its current form.

One of the panels, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform would give taxpayers a tax credit worth 12 percent of their donations — but only if they contributed 2 percent or more of their adjusted gross income to charity.

Another plan proposed by a panel of three liberal-leaning organizations — Demos, the Economic Policy Institute and the Century Foundation — is similar, suggesting a 25 percent tax credit for all charitable gifts.

The plan philanthropic experts find the most intriguing, however, comes from the Bipartisan Policy Center panel, which suggests borrowing a system of subsidizing nonprofits similar to the one used in Britain, called Gift Aid.

Under that proposal, nonprofits could claim a tax credit worth 15 percent of any charitable gift they received, effectively giving the donor a partial match. For instance, if a donor makes a charitable gift of $100 to a charity, the charity could apply to receive an additional $15 from the government.

I’m partial to this proposal from the Partnership for Philanthropic Planning (via Gift Hub):

For many years, PPP has suggested a conceptual alternative to the charitable deduction. PPP’s plan addresses the current goal of simplifying the tax code, while supporting a robust nonprofit sector that can compensate for reduced government services. Rather than a deduction from income, we propose that charitable contributions be treated as an adjustment from gross income. Since the donor never receives the benefit of income which is contributed to charity, the amount contributed should be considered unavailable for taxation at all. Far from the “tax expenditure” that the [National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform] suggests, allowing charitable contributions as adjustments to income would provide a fair and accessible incentive for charitable giving to all Americans.

And of course, don’t forget the background context of rising inequity, a lapsed estate tax, and the models of individually-determined giving versus democratically-determined (ostensibly) government grants and earmarks.

I was annoyed by my previous post quoting the New York Times’ usage of “blue ribbon panel” (and the numerous appeals to authority in that entire article) that I looked it up using Google Search’s timeline: site:nytimes.com [“blue ribbon panel” OR “blue ribbon commission”]. There were 621 results.

From a Facebook comment on Kate Barr’s “ Nonprofits, Social Enterprise, and Hot Buttons” ( blog link):

The craving to undermine nonprofit signficance, value and tax-exemption is endless and will probably never be “satisified” until the entire 501-c section of the tax code is repealed. And there do exist those who want to do exactly that. Those who deeply resent paying taxes at all loathe the nonprofit field for its tax exemption. They won’t stop and they won’t shut up, even when repeatedly, humiliatingly and thoroughly refuted.

This is a perspective I share, though rarely so explicitly.