To avoid having to restart a job from the beginning in case of random failure, it is standard practice to save periodically sufficient information to enable the job to be restarted at the previous point at which information was saved. Such points are referred to as checkpoints, and the saving of such information at these points is called checkpointing [1].

Serological assays and a two-tiered test algorithm are recommended for laboratory confirmation of Lyme disease. In the United States, the sensitivity of two-tiered testing using commercially available serology-based assays is dependent on the stage of infection and ranges from 30% in the early localized disease stage to near 100% in late-stage disease. Other variables, including subjectivity in reading Western blots, compliance with two-tiered recommendations, use of different first-and second-tier test combinations, and use of different test samples, all contribute to variation in two-tiered test performance. The availability and use of sample sets from well-characterized Lyme disease patients and controls are needed to better assess the performance of existing tests and for development of improved assays. To address this need, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health prospectively collected sera from patients at all stages of Lyme disease, as well as healthy donors and patients with look-alike diseases. Patients and healthy controls were recruited using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Samples from all included patients were retrospectively characterized by two-tiered testing. The results from two-tiered testing corroborated the need for novel and improved diagnostics, particularly for laboratory diagnosis of earlier stages of infection. Furthermore, the two-tiered results provide a baseline with samples from well-characterized patients that can be used in comparing the sensitivity and specificity of novel diagnostics. Panels of sera and accompanying clinical and laboratory testing results are now available to Lyme disease serological test users and researchers developing novel tests.

Francisella tularensis subspecies tularensis (type A) and holarctica (type B) are of clinical importance in causing tularemia. Molecular typing methods have further separated type A strains into three genetically distinct clades, A1a, A1b and A2. Epidemiological analyses of human infections in the United States suggest that A1b infections are associated with a significantly higher mortality rate as compared to infections caused by A1a, A2 and type B. To determine if genetic differences as defined by molecular typing directly correlate with differences in virulence, A1a, A1b, A2 and type B strains were compared in C57BL/6 mice. Here we demonstrate significant differences between survival curves for infections caused by A1b versus A1a, A2 and type B, with A1b infected mice dying earlier than mice infected with A1a, A2 or type B; these results were conserved among multiple strains. Differences were also detected among type A clades as well as between type A clades and type B with respect to bacterial burdens, and gross anatomy in infected mice. Our results indicate that clades defined within F. tularensis subsp. tularensis by molecular typing methods correlate with virulence differences, with A1b strains more virulent than A1a, A2 and type B strains. These findings indicate type A strains are not equivalent with respect to virulence and have important implications for public health as well as basic research programs.

This study connected home and school literacy contexts by involving parents in developmentally appropriate and culturally sensitive literacy activities with their children. The purpose of the program was to enhance children's achievement and interest in literacy. The family program was similar to a literature-based school program that included classroom Literacy centers, teacher-modeled literature activities, and literacy center time. Meetings were held monthly, with parents, teachers, and children all working together. The program was in an inner-city school district including African American and Latino families. There were 56 children in 1st through 3rd grades (28 in the experimental group and 28 in the control). Preand posttest data determined achievement and motivation differences favoring the children in the family program.A child's success in school literacy programs often depends on the experiences he or she has at home; consequently, there have been many efforts to understand powerftil home-school literacy connections. For example, when parents from diverse backgrounds are helped to communicate with school personnel, they can collaborate with teachers to contribute to children's growth (Casanova, 1987;Chavkin & Williams, 1994). An overarching conception of home-school connection motivating the present work was the possibility of providing home-school literacy connection programs that are sensitive to diverse cultures by using the resources already within the family. We also wanted to provide additional strategies for parents to help their children. We hoped to design a program that included reciprocity, equality, and respect between those involved (Hale, 1982).A program was created to heighten the awareness of parents, children, and teachers concerning the importance of the role they all play together in the literacy development of children. We were interested in the effects of this family literacy program on enhancing children's achievement and motivation to read and write, as well as on parents' and teachers' interests and attitudes about literacy development.The treatment carried out in this study for teachers, parents, and children included the design of rich literacy

The ability to read and write for a variety of purposes is essential to success in school and in contemporary society. The purpose of this investigation was to conduct an exhaustive review of the literature and a meta-analysis of literacy research in the field of deaf education. Computer and manual searches of 40 years of peer-reviewed journal articles were conducted. A total of 964 articles related to literacy and deafness were identified and examined; 22 articles met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Results indicate that (a) no two studies examined the same dimension of literacy; (b) there was a paucity of well-designed group studies; (c) there were no systematic replication of studies; (d) there is limited data to establish evidenced-based practices. Consequently, increasing the quantity and improving the quality of research in the field is recommended.