DOCSLIB.ORG

Impact Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Decathlon Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impact Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Decathlon Program DOE/EE-0843 Impact Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Decathlon Program Submitted to: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 Prepared by: Lockheed Martin Energy Services Energy Solutions Group 2277 Research Boulevard Rockville, MD 20850 FINAL REPORT December 2012 Acknowledgements This study has benefited from the contributions of many individuals. Jeff Dowd of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) initiated the study. Lockheed Martin performed the evaluation under subcontract to Sandia National Laboratories. Gretchen Jordan, Sandia National Laboratories’ study manager during most of the study, provided invaluable oversight and critical guidance that helped keep the project on track. The Lockheed Martin study team comprised Harley Barnes, principal investigator; Kelly Koser, statistician and principal analyst for the study; Nancy Hassett, statistician during the design phase; Bill Steigelmann, internal reviewer and engineering consultant; Todd Shea and Stephen Gilley, graphics; Tom Henkel, solar energy systems consultant; and Rosa Cassidy, Michael Pilat, and Hilary Haselden, who served as team interviewers and observers at the 2009 Solar Decathlon. David Schieren, President of Empower Solar led the efforts by the Solar Decathlon Alumni Association (SDAA) to develop a sample frame of Former Decathletes. As a result of SDAA’s efforts, the study benefited from the online survey input of more Former Decathletes than it probably would have obtained otherwise. Matt Beck of SDAA programmed the Former Decathlete online survey. The following members of the DOE staff took time to describe innovative ideas they observed at the Solar Decathlons and the prospects for turning the ideas into research: Richard King, Program Manager of the DOE Solar Decathlon, and Charles Hemmeline, Lew Pratsch, Terry Logee, and Robert Hassett of EERE. The following reviewers provided valuable input during the study. Those who reviewed the evaluation design provided advice that greatly helped the study team deal with the challenges of the research subject and evaluation design. The study team is grateful for their comments. Jeff Dowd, Program Evaluation Lead, Office of Strategic Programs, DOE/EERE Yaw Agyeman, Program Manager, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Ed Vine, Program Director, Planning and Evaluation, California Institute for Energy and Environment Cheryl Oros, President Oros Consulting, LLC Michelle Fox, Chief Strategist for Education & Workforce Development, DOE/EERE Sheila Dillard, Senior Policy & Communications Analyst, DOE/EERE Richard King, Solar Decathlon Program Manager, DOE/EERE Jamie Vernon, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Science & Technology Policy Fellow, DOE/EERE Ryan Kerney, AAAS, Science & Technology Policy Fellow, DOE/EERE The DOE would like to thank Carolyn Marton of New West Technologies, LLC for copy editing this report and preparing it for DOE publication. Any errors in the report remain the sole responsibility of the authors. i Notice This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, usefulness, or any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. ii Table of Contents Solar Decathlon Impact Evaluation Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... ES.1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 The Solar Decathlon Program .......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purposes of the Impact Evaluation ................................................................................... 2 1.3 Organization of the Evaluation Findings in This Report ................................................. 3 2. Evaluation Methodology ............................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Logic Model of the Solar Decathlon Program ................................................................. 4 2.2 Evaluation Research Design............................................................................................. 4 2.2.1 Solar Decathlon Audiences Selected for the Evaluation .......................................... 5 2.2.2 Research Design Issues and the Use of Multiple Sources of Evidence .................... 8 2.3 Research Questions ........................................................................................................ 17 2.4 Data Collection............................................................................................................... 20 2.5 A Word about the Terminology Used in This Report .................................................... 22 3. Findings Relevant to the Homeowner Objectives .................................................................... 24 3.1 Actions Denoting Awareness of the Opportunities that Solar Energy Systems Offer for Houses ............................................................................................................ 24 3.1.1 Impact of a Visit to the Solar Decathlon on the Homeowner Decision Process for Installing a Solar Energy System ........................................................ 26 3.1.2 Impact of the Media and Word-of-mouth-alone on Decisions to Install Solar Energy Systems by Aware Homeowners ............................................................... 32 3.2 Actions Denoting Awareness of the Opportunities that Energy-efficient Appliance Products and Lighting Equipment Offer for Houses ..................................................... 35 3.2.1 Impact of a Visit to the Solar Decathlon on Installations of Energy-efficient Products .................................................................................................................. 37 3.2.2 Impact of the Media and Word-of-mouth-alone on Installations of Energy-efficient Products....................................................................................... 46 3.3 Knowledge of Solar House Features and Energy-efficient Products ............................. 49 3.3.1 Impact of a Visit to the Solar Decathlon on Knowledge of Residential Solar Energy Systems and Energy-efficient Products ............................................ 50 3.3.2 Impact of the Media and Word-of-mouth Alone on Knowledge of Residential Solar Energy Systems and Energy-efficient Products ............................................ 53 3.4 Findings Relevant to the Homeowner Objectives—Conclusions .................................. 54 4. Findings Relevant to the Participating-student Objectives ...................................................... 62 4.1 Education Findings Related to the Opportunities Presented by Clean-energy Products.......................................................................................................................... 62 iii Table of Contents Solar Decathlon Impact Evaluation 4.1.1 Comparative Knowledge ........................................................................................ 63 4.1.2 Learning from the Solar Decathlon Compared to Regular Coursework ................. 64 4.2 Preparation of Decathletes to Enter the Clean-energy Workforce ................................. 65 4.2.1 Changing to a Major Related to Clean Energy ....................................................... 66 4.2.2 Career Choices........................................................................................................ 66 4.2.3 Impact of Participation in a Solar Decathlon on Getting a Job in the Clean-energy Workforce ........................................................................................ 68 4.3 Influence of Former Decathletes on Clean-energy Installations .................................... 69 4.3.1 Influence on the Installation of Renewable-energy Equipment .............................. 70 4.3.2 Impact on the Installation of Energy-efficient Equipment ..................................... 71 4.4 Findings Relevant to the Participating-student Objectives—Conclusions .................... 73 5. Participating Students’ Assessment of Their Solar Decathlon Experience .............................. 78 5.1 Summary of Former Decathlete Comments from the Online Survey ............................ 78 5.1.1 Comments about the Impact of the Solar Decathlon on the Former Decathletes ... 78 5.1.2 Suggestions for Future Solar Decathlons................................................................ 79 5.2 Summary of Faculty Advisor Comments from the Online Survey ...............................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1978 Decathlon Results Scoring: 1
    1978 Decathlon Results Scoring: 1. John Whitson, Albequerqe, N.M., 7,828 points 2. Jim Howell, Hurricane Track Club, Houston, Texas, 7,658 3. Mike Hill, Boulder, Colo., 7,484 4. Wes Herbat, Houston, Texas, 7,448 5. Billy Blackburn, Auburn Track Club, 7,428 6. Robert Baker, Principia, 7,323 7. Mark Lineweaver, Hurricane Track Club, 7,319 8. Jim Wooding, Devon, Pa., 7,218 9. Steve Benedict, Ga., 7,181 10. Barry Stebbins, Fargo, N.D., 7,123 11. Jim Schnur, Cincinnati, 7,122 12. Chip Troxclair, LSU, 7,074 13. Rex Harvey, Redfield, Iowa, 6,966 Individual Results: 100 Meter High Hurdles: Howell, :14.5, 903 points Hill, :14.6, 892 points Whitson, :14.7, 881 points Wooding, :14.9, 859 points Stebbins, :15.2, 827 points Herbat, :15.5, 797 points Lineweaver, :15.6, 787 points Benedict, :15.8, 767 points Blackburn, :15.9, 757 points Harvey, :16.0, 748 points Baker, :16.3, 721 points Troxclair, :16.4, 712 points Schnur, :16.5, 703 points Discus: Herbat, 152-11, 811 Blackburn, 144-3, 762 Whitson, 140-10, 742 Howwell, 139-6, 734 Baker, 135-4, 710 Hill, 131-0, 684 Lineweaver, 128-2, 667 Harvey, 127-0, 660 Wooding, 120-6, 619 Benedict, 118-7, 608 Troxclair, 115-3, 586 Stebbins, 111-9, 564 Schnur, 104-3, 514 Pole Vault Whitson, 15-9, 1,005 Harvey, 15-5, 981 Benedict, 15-1 ¼, 957 Troxclair, 15-1 ¼, 957 Howell, 14-1 ¼, 884 Lineweaver, 13-9 ½. 859 Baker, 13-9 ½, 859 Blackburn, 13-5 ½, 832 Herbat, 13-5 ½, 832 Stebbins, 12-9 ½, 780 Hill, 12-9 ¾, 754 Wooding, 12-1 ¾, 728 Schnur, 11-2, 644 Javelin Whitson, 210-10, 813 Blackburn, 194-0, 751 Stebbins, 189-6, 733 Herbat, 189-5, 733 Baker, 188-1.
    [Show full text]
  • Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games Nomination Criteria
    Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games Nomination Criteria Selection Criteria Amendments • February 19, 2021 o Section 1.2: . Removed reference to NACAC Combined Events Championships, which has been cancelled. The dates and location of the Canadian Combined Events Trials is now to-be-confirmed. Moved the Final Nomination for Marathon and Race Walk to July 2 to align with all other events. Moved the final declaration deadline for all events to June 10, 2021. Updated dates for: Final Preparation Camp, On-site Decision Making Authority, Athletics Competition and Departing Japan o Section 1.3: . Removed requirement to participate in Canadian Championships. Added requirement to comply with COVID-19 countermeasures. o Section 1.6: Added reference to Reserve Athletes. o Section 3: Removed requirement to participate in Canadian Championships. o Section 4.1 . Step 2: Removed: “For the avoidance of doubt, the NTC will not nominate athletes for individual events who are only qualified to be entered due to World Athletics’ “reallocations due to unused quota places” after July 1, 2021 (June 2, 2021 for Marathon and Race Walk).” . Final Nomination Meeting: Added prioritization process for athletes qualifying for both the Women’s Marathon and 10,000m. o Section 4.2: . Removed: “AC will not accept any offers of unused quota places for relay teams made after July 1, 2021;” . Step 1: Removed automatic nomination for national champions. o Section 8: Added language regarding possible further amendments necessitated by COVID-19. • October 6, 2020 o Section 1.2: Updated qualification period to match World Athletics adjustments for Marathon and 50k Race Walk. Updated dates for NACAC Combined Events Championships (Athletics Canada Combined Events Trials).
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Decathlon Heptathlon Information
    THE 64th NH STATE DECATHLON CHAMPIONSHIPS THE 44th NH STATE HEPTATHLON CHAMPIONSHIPS PRESENTED BY NASHUA SOUTH AT NASHUA HIGH SCHOOL NORTH June 18-20, 2021 MEET INFORMATION ENTRIES FOR HEPTATHLON AND DECATHLON ARE TO BE MADE ON DIRECT ATHLETICS FROM MAY 21st – JUNE 16th. PLEASE BE SURE TO INDICATE EACH ATHLETE’S PERSONAL BEST HIGH JUMP HEIGHT IN THE HEPTATHLON AND PERSONAL BEST POLE VAULT HEIGHT IN THE DECATHLON. THERE IS A $40 ENTRY FEE FOR EACH ATHLETE ENTERED. ENTRY FEES MUST BE PAID FOR ALL ATHLETES ENTERED IN ORDER FOR ANY OF YOUR ATHLETES TO COMPETE. IF YOU ENTERED AN ATHLETE THAT IS NOT COMPETING YOU MUST STILL PAY THE $40 ENTRY FEE. PLEASE REMOVE YOUR ATHLETE PRIOR TO THE 16th. YOUR SCHOOL WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN FUTURE COMPETITIONS WITH AN UNPAID BALANCE. FEE MUST BE PAID BY OR ON FRIDAY, JUNE 18th OR SATURDAY, JUNE 19th, WHEN YOU ARRIVE. MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: NASHUA HIGH SOUTH TRACK AND FIELD TEAM, C/O JASON PALING, 17 MEADE ST., NASHUA, NH 03064. **COMPETITION IS OPEN TO ALL HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETES, INCLUDING INCOMING (2021) FRESHMEN.** COMPETITORS IN DECATHLON AND HEPTATHLON ARE GROUPED SCHOOL, SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEN REGION. SCORING IS BASED ON THE INTERNATIONAL AMATEUR ATHLETIC FEDERATION SCORING TABLES FOR TRACK AND FIELD EVENTS. ALL ATHLETES MUST COMPLETE IN ALL EVENTS FOR ANY POINTS TO BE SCORED OR RECORDS TO BE MADE. ALL RUNNING EVENTS ARE BASED ON TIME. IN THE FIELD EVENTS, A MAXIMUM OF THREE THROWS/JUMPS WILL BE GIVEN. THERE WILL BE NO CONCESSIONS THIS YEAR.
    [Show full text]
  • USA Track and Field Pacific Association COVID-19 VIRTUAL Race Walk Grand Prix
    USA Track and Field Pacific Association COVID-19 VIRTUAL Race Walk Grand Prix 1,500-Meter Race Walk Summary Report Our first event in the 2021 COVID-19 #AloneTogether virtual version of the USA Track and Field Pacific Association Race Walk Grand Prix Series was a 1,500-meter Virtual Race Walk, conducted from February 6 to 28, 2021. Race rules were distributed prior to the race. The event was conducted on city streets and sidewalks, school tracks, parking lots, paved pathways, park trails, and treadmills across the USA. There were 24 participants ranging in age from 15 to 82. Winners Podium # TOP 3 FEMALES TOP 3 MALES TOP 3 AGE GRADES 1 Adeline Johnson 6:34.35 Nick Christie 6:22.25 Adeline Johnson 89.44% 2 Robyn Stevens 6:55.50 Adrian Zamudio Karen Stoyanowski 7:30.10 83.21% 3 Aleshka McPretl 8:05.56 Alex Price 8:30.00 Robyn Stevens 83.10% Prizes (California- and Nevada-shaped rock pins) will be awarded at the luncheon following the 10-km and 20-km Grand Prix Race Walks in Carmichael/Sacramento on Sunday, 26 September, 2021, to the top three females, top three males, and top three age-graded athletes in each of the contested virtual race walk events. Winners must be present to receive their prizes; if a winning athlete is not present, the prize will be given to the next athlete in that category. Judging Summary Most officiating and judging was virtual, and all of the highly-qualified virtual officials and judges were everywhere at the same time while still managing to maintain safe distancing.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Aau Junior Olympic Games Multi-Events/Racewalk
    FINAL SCHEDULE- 7/25/21 2021 AAU JUNIOR OLYMPIC GAMES HUMBLE HIGH SCHOOL, HUMBLE, TEXAS MULTI-EVENT/TRACK & FIELD MEET SCHEDULE YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT THE MEET SCHEDULE OUTLINED BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE. CLASSIFICATION 8&UG - 8 and under (2013 & After) 12B - 12 years old (2009) 8&UB - 8 and under (2013 & After) 13G – 13 years old (2008) 9G - 9 years old (2012) 13B – 13 years old (2008) 9B - 9 years old (2012) 14G - 14 years old (2007) 10G - 10 years old (2011) 14B - 14 years old (2007) 10B - 10 years old (2011) 15-16G - 15-16 years old (2005-2006) 11G - 11 years old (2010) 15-16B - 15-16 years old (2005-2006) 11B - 11 years old (2010) 17-18G - 17-18 years old (2003-2004) 12G - 12 years old (2009) 17-18B- 17-18 years old (2003-2004) Q = Quarterfinals S = Semifinals F = Finals TF = Timed Final MULTI-EVENTS/RACEWALK SATURDAY, JULY 31 TIME EVENT/AGE GROUP RACE 8:00 AM Decathlon 15-16B (Day 1) 100M, LJ, SP, HJ, 400M 8:15 AM Pentathlon 13G (Finals) 100M Hurdles SP, HJ, LJ, 800M 8:30 AM Pentathlon 13B (Finals) 100M Hurdles, SP, HJ, LJ, 1500M 9:00 AM Decathlon 17-18B (Day 1) 100M, LJ, SP, HJ, 400M 10:30 AM Heptathlon 15-16G (Day 1) 100M Hurdles, HJ, SP, 200M 10:45 AM Heptathlon 17-18G (Day 1) 100M Hurdles, HJ, SP, 200M 11:00 AM Pentathlon 14G (Finals) 100M Hurdles, SP, HJ, LJ, 800M 11:30 AM Pentathlon 14B (Finals) 100M Hurdles, SP, HJ, LJ, 1500M 12:00 PM 1500M Racewalk (9G, 9B, 10G, 10B) TF 2:00 PM 1500M Racewalk (11G, 11B, 12G, 12B) TF SUNDAY, AUGUST 1 TIME EVENT/AGE GROUP RACE 8:00 AM Heptathlon 15-16G (Day
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Dimensional Characteristics Analysis of Decathlon Champion Achievement of Modern Olympic Game
    International Workshop on Computer Science in Sports (IWCSS 2013) Multi-dimensional Characteristics Analysis of Decathlon Champion Achievement of Modern Olympic Game Changmei Huang Weihua Shen Institute of Physical Education Institute of Physical Education Hunan University of Science and Technology Hunan University of Science and Technology Xiangtan Hunan, P.R. China Xiangtan Hunan, P.R. China [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—Using the methods of literature material, expert selecting of the world elite male decathlon and making interview, quantity statistics and grey correlation analysis, training plan with beneficial reference. the paper has carried on the multiple perspectives and multi-level grey correlation analysis of Olympic men's II. RESEARCH OBJECTS AND METHODS decathlon champion achievement. The results reveal the relationship of total result and events; relationship of events A. Research Objects and individual event, and then, gets the further discussion The paper collects decathlon champion performance of and analysis, relevant conclusions. The result aimed to Olympic Games. According to the international establish scientific training plan for decathlon coaches, and association of athletics federations formulation method in prepare for the next Olympic game with the beneficial reference and strategic significance. 1985, performances are divided into seven stages, that is 1920-1928(from the 7th to the 9th: 5881 points, 6561 Keywords-Decathlon; Olympic Game; champion result; points, 6561 points); 1932-1948 (from the 10th to the 14th: Grey relational analysis 6815 points, 7341 points, 7341 points); 1952-1960 (from the 15th to 17th, 7592 points, 7614 points, 7614 points); 1964-1972 (from the 18th to 20th: the 7816 points, 8144 I.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Racewalking the Future of USA Racewalking: Are You Already Coaching a Potential Olympian?
    1/9/2009 A Brief History of Racewalking The Future of USA Racewalking: Are you already coaching a potential Olympian? Dave McGovern, MSS World Class Racewalking www.racewalking.org Although competitive walking can trace its roots back to 16th century Europe, the 19th Century was the Golden Age of walking in the US. Pedestrian races were immensely popular in the US and Great Britain throughout the 19th and into the early 20th century. Ultra races ranging from from 12 hours to six days were among the most popular spectator sports during the Victorian era. Large prize purses were common and betting was prolific. Due to its popularity at the time, racewalking became one of the first events on the Olympic program. 1 1/9/2009 Racewalking first appeared in the Olympics in 1904 as an event in the “all- Henry Laskau, Ron rounder,” the precursor Laird, Larry Young to the decathlon. In and other US walkers 1906, separate 1, 500- were among the best meter and 3,500-meter in the world through races were contested. the 1950s and ‘60s. Over the years distances were gradually increased to the current 20km and 50km events. U.S. Olympic Men’s Trials Qualifiers 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 20k Trials 24 27 21 15 12 13 14 qualifiers (1:33) (1:32) (1:30) (1:30) (1:33) (1:34) (1:36) 50k Trials 16 23 15 15 13 13 14 qualifiers (4:30) (4:30) (4:30)* (4:25)* (4:35) (4:45) (4:45) Racewalking remained reasonably popular in North America through the 1980s, but we’ve been on a steady decline ever since.
    [Show full text]
  • PB1589-Commercial Insect and Mite Control for Trees, Shrubs and Flowers
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Commercial Horticulture UT Extension Publications 4-2006 PB1589-Commercial Insect and Mite Control for Trees, Shrubs and Flowers The University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_agexcomhort Part of the Horticulture Commons Recommended Citation "PB1589-Commercial Insect and Mite Control for Trees, Shrubs and Flowers," The University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service, PB1589 1M 4/06Rev) E12-4615-00-009-06 06-0251, https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_agexcomhort/11 The publications in this collection represent the historical publishing record of the UT Agricultural Experiment Station and do not necessarily reflect current scientific knowledge or ecommendations.r Current information about UT Ag Research can be found at the UT Ag Research website. This Production and Management is brought to you for free and open access by the UT Extension Publications at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Commercial Horticulture by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. $8.00 PB1589 Commercial Insect and Mite Control for Trees, Shrubs and Flowers Commercial Insect and Mite Control for Trees, Shrubs and Flowers Frank A. Hale, Professor Entomology and Plant Pathology Table of Contents Seasonal Appearance of Ornamental Pests and Normal Time Frame to Apply
    [Show full text]
  • University of Rochester Men's Track & Field All-Time Ncaa Championship Participants
    UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEN’S TRACK & FIELD ALL-TIME NCAA CHAMPIONSHIP PARTICIPANTS INDOOR TRACK AND FIELD 1985 Indoor (No Score) – Lewiston, ME (Bates) Tom Tuori 1500 Meters – 8th, 3:54.6 5000 Meters – 7th, 14:43.6 1987 Indoor (T-25th of 45, 4 points) – Chicago, IL (Chicago) Tom Tuori 1500 Meters – 4th, 3:53.80 (P), 3:52.46 (F) (All-American) 1988 Indoor (No Score) – Northampton, MA (Smith) Al Smith 5000 Meters – 10th, 15:14.1 1991 Indoor (T-31st of 35, 2 points) – Middletown, CT (Wesleyan) Jim Dunlop 5000 Meters – 5th, 14:39.13 (All-American) Matt Montross High Jump – T-9th, 1.97 meters/6’5.5’’ 1992 Indoor (No Score) – Stevens Point, WI (Wisconsin-Stevens Point) Jim Dunlop 5000 Meters – 12th, 15:22.20 Matt Montross High Jump – 7th, 2.09 meters/6’10.25’’ 1995 Indoor (T-24th of 39, 6 points) – Ada, OH (Ohio Northern) Luis Alejandro Weight Throw – 3rd, 18.01 meters/59’1.25’’ (P), 17.48 meters/57’4.25’’ (F) (All-American) Jason Hart 1500 Meters – 6th, 3:59.53 (P), 3:57.02 (F) (All-American) 1996 Indoor (No Score) – Northampton, MA (Smith) Jason Hart 800 Meters – 8th, 1:54.39 (P), 1:54.72 (F) 1997 Indoor (T-18th of 37, 8 points) – Oshkosh, WI (Wisconsin-Oshkosh) Andrew Evans 5000 Meters – 2nd, 14:40.07 (All-American) 2005 Indoor (T-43rd of 52, 3 points) – Bloomington, IL (Illinois Wesleyan) Kirk Bristol 4x400 Meter Relay – 9th, 3:22.10 Christopher Clark 4x400 Meter Relay – 9th, 3:22.10 Brian MacIlvain 4x400 Meter Relay – 9th, 3:22.10 Matt Tierney 400 Meters – 12th, 50.80 seconds 4x400 Meter Relay – 9th, 3:22.10 Andrew Wunder Weight Throw
    [Show full text]
  • Athletics Ann Report 07-08:Layout 1
    2007/08 ANNUAL REPORT 2007–2008 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS Company Information 1 Directors’ Profiles 2 Chairman’s Report 3 CEO’s Report 4 Directors’ Report 7 Statement of Financial Performance 9 Statement of Financial Position 9 Statement of Changes in Equity 10 Statement of Cash Flows 10 Notes to the Financial Statements 11 Independent Audit Report 16 Compilation Report 17 Detailed Profit and Loss 18 Competition Advisory Panel 20 Regional Coordinator Report 22 Administration & Communication 28 Clubs on Track 29 Officials Report 30 Emerging Athlete Program 31 Membership Statistics 34 2007 – 2008 NSW Championships 38 NSW Roll of Honour 47 ANSW Awards 49 Life Members 50 Merit Award Holders 50 ATHLETICS NSW LIMITED (FOUNDED 20 APRIL, 1887, INCORPORATED 15 JANUARY, 1996) Postal Address: PO Box 595, Sydney Markets, NSW 2129 Street Address: Sydney Olympic Park Athletics Centre, Edwin Flack Drive, Sydney Olympic Park, NSW 2127 Edited by Tim McGrath Telephone: (02) 9746 1122 Designed by KDR Design+Print Facsimile: (02) 9746 1168 Photography by Getty Images, Email: [email protected] Kel Bradstock (Photos in a Flash), Website: www.nswathletics.org.au Tim McGrath COMPANY INFORMATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Geoffrey Martin Peter Bromley (Chairman) Robert Mitchell Elizabeth Miller Ron Richter Betty Moore Covener: Andrew Matthew (Competition Manager) Phillip O’Hara Michael O’Mara Membership John Patchett David Archbold Mark Rosenberg Les Carter Gordon Windeyer Greg Doyle Max Wilkinson STANDARDS COMMITTEE Katherine Rae Betty Moore Andrew Matthews Convenor:
    [Show full text]
  • Runners of a Different Race: North American Indigenous Athletes and National Identities in the Early Twentieth Century
    RUNNERS OF A DIFFERENT RACE: NORTH AMERICAN INDIGENOUS ATHLETES AND NATIONAL IDENTITIES IN THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY by TARA KEEGAN A THESIS Presented to the Department of History and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts June 2016 THESIS APPROVAL PAGE Student: Tara Áine Keegan Title: Runners of a Different Race: North American Indigenous Athletes and National Identities in the Early Twentieth Century This thesis has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree in the Department of History by: Jeffrey Ostler Chairperson Marsha Weisiger Member Steven Beda Member Joe Henderson Member and Scott L. Pratt Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded June 2016 ii © 2016 Tara Áine Keegan iii THESIS ABSTRACT Tara Áine Keegan Master of Arts Department of History June 2016 Title: Runners of a Different Race: North American Indigenous Athletes and National Identities in the Early Twentieth Century This thesis explores the intersection of indigeneity and modernity in early- twentieth-century North America by examining Native Americans in competitive running arenas in both domestic and international settings. Historians have analyzed sports to understand central facets of this intersection, including race, gender, nationalism, assimilation, and resistance. But running, specifically, embodies what was both indigenous and modern, a symbol of both racial and national worth at a time when those categories coexisted uneasily. The narrative follows one main case study: the “Redwood Highway Indian Marathon,” a 480-mile footrace from San Francisco, California, to Grants Pass, Oregon, contested between Native Americans from Northern California and New Mexico in 1927 and 1928.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Event Height/Weight Age Group Round # of Ath 9:00 100M Men 60
    Tuesday August 8; Day 1 Time Event Height/Weight Age Group Round # of Ath 9:00 100m Men 60-64 & 65 + Decathlon 100m Men 55-59 Decathlon 100m Men 50-54 Decathlon 100m Men 40-44 & 45-49 Decathlon 100m Men 18-29; 30-34; 35-39 Decathlon 10:00 Long Jump All Divisions Decathlon 11:30 Shot Put 5K Men 60-64 & 65 + Decathlon Shot Put 6K Men 50-54 & 55-59 Decathlon Shot Put 7.26K Men 18-29; 30-34; 35-39 Decathlon 1:00 High Jump All Divisions Decathlon 2:30 400 m Men 60-64 & 65 + Decathlon 400 m Men 55-59 Decathlon 400 m Men 50-54 Decathlon 400 m Men 40-44 & 45-49 Decathlon 400 m Men 18-29; 30-34; 35-39 Decathlon 10:00 Discus 1K Women 50+;55+;60+;65+;70+;75+ Final Discus 1K Women 40-44 & 45-49 Final Discus 1K Women 18+;30+;35+ Final 1:00 Shot Put Women 60+; 65+; 70+;75+ Final Shot Put Women 50-54 & 55-59 Final Shot Put Women 40-44 & 45-49 Final Shot Put Women 30-34 & 35-39 Final Shot Put Women 18-29 Final 11:30 5000 m Walk Women All Divisions Final 5000 m Walk Men 50+;55+;60+;65+;70+;75+ Final 5000 m Walk Men 18+;30+;35+;40+;45+ Final 2:50 800m Grand Master A & C Women Final 800m Master A & B Women Final 800m Senior A & B Women Final 800m Open Women Final 800m Men 65+; 70+; 75+ Final 800m Men 60-64 Final 800m Men 55-59 Final 800m Men 50-54 Final 800m Men 45-49 Final 800m Men 40-44 Final 800m Men 35-39 Final 800m Men 30-34 Final 800m Men 18-29 Final Wednesday August 9 Day 2 Time Event Height/Weight Age Group # of Ath 9:00 100 m Hurdles 33" All Women Divisions Heptathlon 9:35 High Jump All Divisions Women Heptathlon 10:45 Shot Put All Divisions Women
    [Show full text]