document_title: Purple martin

question_text: where do purple martins go in the winter

text: Purple martin

text: Description and taxonomy[edit]

text: Purple martins are a kind of swallow, of the genus Progne. Like other members of this genus, they are larger than most of the other swallows. The average length from bill to tail is 20 cm (7.9 in). Adults have a slightly forked tail. Adult males are entirely black with glossy steel blue sheen, the only swallow in North America with such coloration. Adult females are dark on top with some steel blue sheen, and lighter underparts. Subadult females look similar to adult females minus the steel blue sheen and browner on the back. Subadult males look very much like females, but solid black feathers emerge on their chest in a blotchy, random pattern as they molt to their adult plumage.[2]

text: This species was first described by Linnaeus in his Systema naturae in 1758 as Hirundo subis.[3] The current genus name refers to Procne (Πρόκνη), a mythological girl who was turned into a swallow to save her from her husband. She had killed their son to avenge the rape of her sister. The specific subis is Latin and refers to a type of bird that breaks eagles’ eggs; it may have been applied to this species because of its aggression towards birds of prey when it is nesting.[4]

text: The species of this genus are very closely related, and some view the purple martin, gray-breasted martin, snowy-bellied martin, and southern martin, as a superspecies.[5]

text: Subspecies[edit]

text:
P. s. subis, is the nominate form, with the typical features of the species, breeds in eastern and mid-western North America.
P. s. hesperia of the Mexico and the southwestern United States, is distinguished primarily by its nesting habits.
P. s. arboricola of western mountains is large with females paler on underparts.

text: Distribution and habitat[edit]

text: Purple martins' breeding range is throughout temperate North America.[6] Their breeding habitat is open areas across eastern North America, and also some locations on the west coast from British Columbia to Mexico.[7] Martins make their nests in cavities, either natural or artificial. In many places, humans put up real or artificial hollow gourds, or houses for martins, especially in the east, where purple martins are almost entirely dependent on such structures. As a result, this subspecies typically breeds in colonies located in proximity to people, even within cities and towns. This makes their distribution patchy, as they are usually absent from areas where no nest sites are provided. Western birds often make use of natural cavities such as old woodpecker holes in trees or saguaro cacti.[2][5]

text: The purple martin migrates to the Amazon basin in winter. Its winter range extends into Ecuador[8] but does not seem to ascend far up the Andean foothills.

text: The first record of this species in Europe was a single bird on Lewis, Scotland, on 5–6 September 2004, and the second was on the Azores on 6 September 2004.

text: Conservation status[edit]

text: Purple martins suffered a severe population crash in the 20th century widely linked to the release and spread of European starlings in North America. Starlings and house sparrows compete with martins for nest cavities. Where purple martins once gathered by the thousands, by the 1980s they had all but disappeared. [9]

text: Relationship with humans[edit]

text: The population of eastern purple martins (nominate form P. s. subis) is dependent on artificial martin houses of wood or aluminum and fake plastic gourds, supplied by individuals and organizations fond of the bird. This tradition was in place even before the population crash; Native Americans are said to have hollowed out gourds and erected them for this purpose. The situation requires continual maintenance, as European starlings and house sparrows compete with martins as cavity-nesters, and will fight with martins over nest sites. Starlings have even been known to kill purple martins, especially nestling young, and house sparrows have been known to evict purple martins from their nests. Thus, unmonitored purple martin houses are often overtaken by more aggressive, non-native species.[2] Purple martin proponents are motivated by the concern that the purple martin would likely vanish from eastern North America were it not for this assistance.[10]

text: Behavior[edit]

text: Migration[edit]

text: Wintering in South America, purple martins migrate to North America in spring to breed. Spring migration is somewhat staggered, with arrivals in southern areas such as Florida and Texas in January, but showing up in the northern United States in April and in Canada as late as May. Males usually arrive at a site before females.[2]

text: Fall migration is also staggered, as birds head south when the breeding season is over. Some birds leave as early as July and others stay as late as October. Martins generally migrate over land, through Mexico and Central America. When not breeding, martins form large flocks and roost together in great numbers. This behavior begins just prior to the southern migration and continues on the wintering grounds.[2]

text: Breeding[edit]

text: Males arrive in breeding sites before females, and establish their territory. A territory can consist of several potential nest sites. After forming a pair, both the male and female inspect available nest sites. This process is complicated by the fact that artificial nest sites could be houses with many rooms, clustered gourds, or single gourds. The nest is made inside the cavity of such artificial structures and retains a somewhat flat appearance. The nest is a structure of primarily three levels: the first level acts as a foundation and is usually made up of twigs, mud, small pebbles and in at least a few reported cases, small river mollusk shells were used; the second level of the nest is made up of grasses, finer smaller twigs; the third level of construction composing the nest, is a small compression usually lined with fresh green leaves where the eggs are laid. Three to six eggs are laid, and the female is the main incubator, with some help from the male. Purple martins are generally known to raise only a single brood. Fledging, when the young leave the nest, occurs at about one month, after which the parents continue to feed the fledgling young.[2]

text: Diet[edit]

text: Purple martins are aerial insectivores, meaning that they catch insects from the air. The birds are agile hunters and eat a variety of winged insects. Rarely, they will come to the ground to eat insects. They usually fly relatively high, so, contrary to popular opinion, mosquitoes do not form a large part of their diet.[2] Recent research, however, does indicate that the Purple Martin feeds on invasive fire ants (Solenopsis invicta) and that they may make up a significant portion of their diet.[11]

text: Vocalization[edit]

text: Purple martins are fairly noisy, chirping and making sounds that have been described as chortles, rattles, and croaks.[5] The various calls are said to be "throaty and rich" and can be rendered as tchew-wew, pew pew, choo, cher, zweet and zwrack. The males have a gurgling and guttural courtship song, a dawn song, and even a subsong used at the end of the breeding season.[5][12] Tapes of purple martin song are sold to attract martins to newly established birdhouses.

text:
Purple martin

Problems playing this file? See media help.

text: Footnotes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ BirdLife International (2012). "Progne subis". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Brown, Charles R. Purple Martin (Progne subis); The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, eds. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna. Retrieved 1 November 2009.  Missing or empty |title= (help)
Jump up ^ Linnaeus (1758
Jump up ^ Jobling, James A (2010). The Helm Dictionary of Scientific Bird Names. London: Christopher Helm. pp. 317, 371. ISBN 978-1-4081-2501-4.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Turner, Angela K.; Rose, Chris (1989). Swallows & Martins. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. pp. 7, 123–126. ISBN 0-395-51174-7.
Jump up ^ Attenborough, D. The Life of Birds. 1998. BBC p 297. ISBN 0563-38792-0
Jump up ^ See AOU (2000) for details.
Jump up ^ Guayas and Orellana Provinces: Cisneros-Heredia (2006).
Jump up ^ Hunn, Eugene S. (1982). Birding in Seattle and King County. Seattle Audubon Society. pp. 107–108. ISBN 0914516051.
Jump up ^ "Purple Martin Conservation Association".
Jump up ^ Helms IV, Jackson A., Bridge, Eli S., Godfrey, Aaron P, and Ames, Tayna. (2015): The Purple Martin Update. "Fire Ant Exterminators". 24-27.
Jump up ^ Peterson (1980): p.202

tag: ol


document_title: List of Olympic medalists in snowboarding

question_text: who won the first olympic gold medal in snowboarding

root

text: Snowboarding is a sport that has been contested at the Winter Olympic Games since the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano, Japan.[1] Snowboarding was one of five new sports or disciplines added to the Winter Olympic programme between 1990 and 2002, and was the only one not to have been a previous medal or demonstration event.[2] In 1998, four events, two for men and two for women, were held in two specialities: the giant slalom, a downhill event similar to giant slalom skiing; and the half-pipe, in which competitors perform tricks while going from one side of a semi-circular ditch to the other.[2] Canadian Ross Rebagliati won the men's giant slalom and became the first athlete to win a gold medal in snowboarding.[3] Rebagliati was briefly stripped of his medal by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) after testing positive for marijuana. However, the IOC's decision was reverted following an appeal from the Canadian Olympic Association.[4] For the 2002 Winter Olympics, the giant slalom was dropped in favour of the parallel giant slalom, an event that involves head-to-head racing.[5] In 2006, a third event, the snowboard cross, was held for the first time. In this event, competitors race against each other down a course with jumps, beams and other obstacles.[6]

tag: p

text: Five athletes have won two medals. Philipp Schoch of Switzerland, Shaun White of the United States and Seth Wescott of the United States are the only double gold medalists.[7][8] Karine Ruby of France and Americans Ross Powers and Danny Kass also won two medals.[9] In the men's half-pipe event, American snowboarders have collected six of nine possible medals, achieving a unique medal sweep in 2002.[10] Overall, the United States won a total of 14 medals, more than any other nation. The Americans and the Swiss collected five gold medals each. As of the 2010 Winter Olympics, 60 medals (20 of each colour) have been awarded since 1998, and have been won by athletes from 14 National Olympic Committees.

text:
Table of contents

Men

Big air • Halfpipe • Parallel giant slalom • Snowboard cross • Slopestyle

Women

Big air • Halfpipe • Parallel giant slalom • Snowboard cross • Slopestyle

Discontinued

Giant slalom (men • women) Parallel slalom (men • women)

Statistics

Athlete medal leaders • Medals per year • Medal sweep events

See also        References        External links

tag: table

text: Men[edit]

text: Big air[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Sébastien Toutant
 Canada
Kyle Mack
 United States
Billy Morgan
 Great Britain

text: Halfpipe[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1998 Nagano
details
Gian Simmen
 Switzerland
Daniel Franck
 Norway
Ross Powers
 United States

2002 Salt Lake City
details
Ross Powers
 United States
Danny Kass
 United States
Jarret Thomas
 United States

2006 Turin
details
Shaun White
 United States
Danny Kass
 United States
Markku Koski
 Finland

2010 Vancouver
details
Shaun White
 United States
Peetu Piiroinen
 Finland
Scott Lago
 United States

2014 Sochi
details
Iouri Podladtchikov
 Switzerland
Ayumu Hirano
 Japan
Taku Hiraoka
 Japan

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Shaun White
 United States
Ayumu Hirano
 Japan
Scott James
 Australia

text: Medals:

tag: ul

text:
[show]Rank
Nation
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

1
 United States
4
2
3
9

2
  Switzerland
2

2

3
 Japan

2
1
3

4
 Finland

1
1
2

5
 Norway

1

1

6
 Australia

1
1

text: Slalom[edit]

text: Giant slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1998 Nagano
details
Ross Rebagliati
 Canada
Thomas Prugger
 Italy
Ueli Kestenholz
 Switzerland

text: Parallel giant slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2002 Salt Lake City
details
Philipp Schoch
 Switzerland
Richard Richardsson
 Sweden
Chris Klug
 United States

2006 Turin
details
Philipp Schoch
 Switzerland
Simon Schoch
 Switzerland
Siegfried Grabner
 Austria

2010 Vancouver
details
Jasey-Jay Anderson
 Canada
Benjamin Karl
 Austria
Mathieu Bozzetto
 France

2014 Sochi
details
Vic Wild
 Russia
Nevin Galmarini
 Switzerland
Žan Košir
 Slovenia

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Nevin Galmarini
 Switzerland
Lee Sang-ho
 South Korea
Žan Košir
 Slovenia

text: Parallel slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2014 Sochi
details
Vic Wild
 Russia
Žan Košir
 Slovenia
Benjamin Karl
 Austria

text: Snowboard cross[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2006 Turin
details
Seth Wescott
 United States
Radoslav Židek
 Slovakia
Paul-Henri de Le Rue
 France

2010 Vancouver
details
Seth Wescott
 United States
Mike Robertson
 Canada
Tony Ramoin
 France

2014 Sochi
details
Pierre Vaultier
 France
Nikolay Olyunin
 Russia
Alex Deibold
 United States

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Pierre Vaultier
 France
Jarryd Hughes
 Australia
Regino Hernandez
 Spain

text: Slopestyle[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2014 Sochi
details
Sage Kotsenburg
 United States
Ståle Sandbech
 Norway
Mark McMorris
 Canada

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Red Gerard
 United States
Max Parrot
 Canada
Mark McMorris
 Canada

text: Women[edit]

text: Big air[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Anna Gasser
 Austria
Jamie Anderson
 United States
Zoi Sadowski-Synnott
 New Zealand

text: Half-pipe[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1998 Nagano
details
Nicola Thost
 Germany
Stine Brun Kjeldaas
 Norway
Shannon Dunn
 United States

2002 Salt Lake City
details
Kelly Clark
 United States
Doriane Vidal
 France
Fabienne Reuteler
 Switzerland

2006 Turin
details
Hannah Teter
 United States
Gretchen Bleiler
 United States
Kjersti Buaas
 Norway

2010 Vancouver
details
Torah Bright
 Australia
Hannah Teter
 United States
Kelly Clark
 United States

2014 Sochi
details
Kaitlyn Farrington
 United States
Torah Bright
 Australia
Kelly Clark
 United States

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Chloe Kim
 United States
Liu Jiayu
 China
Arielle Gold
 United States

text: Medals:

text:
[show]Rank
Nation
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

1
 United States
4
2
4
10

2
 Australia
1
1

2

3
 Germany
1

1

4
 Norway

1
1
2

6
 France. China

1

1

7
  Switzerland

1
1

text: Slalom[edit]

text: Giant slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

1998 Nagano
details
Karine Ruby
 France
Heidi Maria Renoth
 Germany
Brigitte Köck
 Austria

text: Parallel giant slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2002 Salt Lake City
details
Isabelle Blanc
 France
Karine Ruby
 France
Lidia Trettel
 Italy

2006 Turin
details
Daniela Meuli
 Switzerland
Amelie Kober
 Germany
Rosey Fletcher
 United States

2010 Vancouver
details
Nicolien Sauerbreij
 Netherlands
Yekaterina Ilyukhina
 Russia
Marion Kreiner
 Austria

2014 Sochi
details
Patrizia Kummer
 Switzerland
Tomoka Takeuchi
 Japan
Alena Zavarzina
 Russia

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Ester Ledecká
 Czech Republic
Selina Jörg
 Germany
Ramona Theresia Hofmeister
 Germany

text: Parallel slalom[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2014 Sochi
details
Julia Dujmovits
 Austria
Anke Karstens
 Germany
Amelie Kober
 Germany

text: Snowboard cross[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2006 Turin
details
Tanja Frieden
 Switzerland
Lindsey Jacobellis
 United States
Dominique Maltais
 Canada

2010 Vancouver
details
Maëlle Ricker
 Canada
Déborah Anthonioz
 France
Olivia Nobs
 Switzerland

2014 Sochi
details
Eva Samková
 Czech Republic
Dominique Maltais
 Canada
Chloé Trespeuch
 France

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Michela Moioli
 Italy
Julia Pereira de Sousa Mabileau
 France
Eva Samková
 Czech Republic

text: Slopestyle[edit]

text:
Games
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2014 Sochi
details
Jamie Anderson
 United States
Enni Rukajärvi
 Finland
Jenny Jones
 Great Britain

2018 Pyeongchang
details
Jamie Anderson
 United States
Laurie Blouin
 Canada
Enni Rukajärvi
 Finland

text: Statistics[edit]

text: Athlete medal leaders[edit]

text:
Athlete
Nation
Olympics
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Total

White, ShaunShaun White
 United States (USA)
2006–2018
3
0
0
3

Anderson, JamieJamie Anderson
 United States (USA)
2014–2018
2
1
0
3

Clark, KellyKelly Clark
 United States (USA)
2002–2018
1
0
2
3

Košir, ŽanŽan Košir
 Slovenia (SLO)
2010-2018
0
1
2
3

Schoch, PhilippPhilipp Schoch
 Switzerland (SUI)
2002–2006
2
0
0
2

Wescott, SethSeth Wescott
 United States (USA)
2006–2010
2
0
0
2

Wild, VicVic Wild
 Russia (RUS)
2014
2
0
0
2

Vaultier, PierrePierre Vaultier
 France (FRA)
2014–2018
2
0
0
2

Bright, TorahTorah Bright
 Australia (AUS)
2010–2014
1
1
0
2

Ruby, KarineKarine Ruby
 France (FRA)
1998–2002
1
1
0
2

Teter, HannahHannah Teter
 United States (USA)
2006–2014
1
1
0
2

Galmarini, NevinNevin Galmarini
 Switzerland (SUI)
2010-2018
1
1
0
2

Samková, EvaEva Samková
 Czech Republic (CZE)
2014–2018
1
0
1
2

Powers, RossRoss Powers
 United States (USA)
1998–2002
1
0
1
2

Kass, DannyDanny Kass
 United States (USA)
2002–2006
0
2
0
2

Hirano, AyumuAyumu Hirano
 Japan (JPN)
2014-2018
0
2
0
2

Maltais, DominiqueDominique Maltais
 Canada (CAN)
2006-2014
0
1
1
2

Kober, AmelieAmelie Kober
 Germany (GER)
2006–2014
0
1
1
2

Karl, BenjaminBenjamin Karl
 Austria (AUT)
2010-2018
0
1
1
2

Rukajärvi, EnniEnni Rukajärvi
 Finland (FIN)
2014–2018
0
1
1
2

McMorris, MarkMark McMorris
 Canada (CAN)
2014-2018
0
0
2
2

text: Medals per year[edit]

text: Numbers in bold indicate the highest medal count at that year's Olympic Games.

text:
Nation
24–94
98
02
06
10
14
18
Total

 Australia (AUS)

–
–
–
1
1
2
4

 Austria (AUT)

1
–
1
2
2
1
7

 Canada (CAN)

1
–
1
3
2
4
11

 China (CHN)

–
–
–
–
—
1
1

 Czech Republic (CZE)

–
–
–
–
1
2
3

 Finland (FIN)

–
–
1
1
1
1
4

 France (FRA)

1
3
1
3
2
2
12

 Germany (GER)

2
–
1
–
2
2
7

 Great Britain (GBR)

–
–
–
–
1
1
2

 Italy (ITA)

1
1
–
–
–
1
3

 Japan (JPN)

–
–
–
–
3
1
4

 Netherlands (NED)

–
–
–
1
–
—
1

 New Zealand (NZL)

–
–
–
–
—
1
1

 Norway (NOR)

2
–
1
–
1
—
4

 Russia (RUS)

–
–
–
1
4
—
5

 Slovakia (SVK)

–
–
1
–
–
—
1

 Slovenia (SLO)

–
–
–
–
2
1
3

 South Korea (KOR)

–
–
–
–
—
1
1

 Spain (ESP)

–
–
–
–
—
1
1

 Sweden (SWE)

–
1
–
–
–
—
1

 Switzerland (SUI)

2
2
4
1
3
1
13

 United States (USA)

2
5
7
5
5
7
31

Year
24–94
98
02
06
10
14
18
–

text: Medal sweep events[edit]

text: These are podium sweep events in which athletes from one NOC won all three medals.

text:
Games
Event
NOC
Gold
Silver
Bronze

2002 Salt Lake City
Men's Halfpipe
 United States (USA)
Ross Powers
Danny Kass
Jarret Thomas


document_title: British undergraduate degree classification

question_text: what is a uk first class honours degree

question_tokens: what is a uk first class honours degree

text: History[edit]

text: In the 16th century, the Regius Professor of Divinity at the University of Cambridge implemented norm referencing to distinguish the top 25% of candidates, the next 50%, and the bottom 25%.

text: The classification system as currently used in the United Kingdom was developed in 1918. Honours were then a means to recognise individuals who demonstrated depth of knowledge or originality, as opposed to relative achievement in examination conditions.

text: Recently, there has been concern over possible grade inflation due to increasing numbers of higher-class honours degrees awarded per annum. The number of first-class honours degrees has reportedly tripled since the 1990s. As with claimed grade inflation of A-levels, prospective employers or educational institutions have observed increased difficulty in selecting candidates. It is, however, unknown whether the rise in the number of first-class degrees is due to grade inflation of whether students are achieving higher levels than in the past, and university leaders have also pointed at the higher A-levels attained by students as evidence that higher degree grades should be expected. On the other hand, the practice of degree classification has been criticised for unduly stigmatising students and being unreflective of a graduate's success or potential for success, particularly in the workplace.

text: Degree classification[edit]

text: A bachelor's degree can be an honours degree (bachelor's with honours) or an ordinary degree (bachelor's without honours). Honours degrees are classified, usually based on a weighted average (with higher weight given to marks in the later years of the course, and often zero weight to those in the first year) of the marks gained in exams and other assessments. Grade boundaries can vary by institution, but typical values are given below.

text:
First-class honours (1st, 1 or I) – typically 70% or higher
Second-class honours;

Upper division (2:1, 2i or II-1) – typically 60–69%
Lower division (2:2, 2ii or II-2) – typically 50–59%

Third-class honours (3rd, 3 or III) – typically 40–49%

text: Students who do not achieve honours may be awarded an ordinary degree, sometimes known as a "pass". Ordinary degrees, and other exit awards such as the Diploma of Higher Education (DipHE; for completing the first two years of a degree course) and Certificate of Higher Education (CertHE; for completing the first year of a degree course), may be unclassified (pass/fail) or, particularly in Scotland where the ordinary degree is offered as a qualification in its own right, classified into pass, merit and distinction. Foundation degrees are normally classified into pass, merit and distinction.[1][2]

text: Integrated master's degrees are usually classified with honours in the same way as a bachelor's honours degree, although some integrated master's degrees are classified like postgraduate taught master's degrees into pass (usually 50%), merit (60%) and distinction (70%).[3][4]

text: At most institutions, the system allows a small amount of discretion.[5] A candidate may be elevated to the next degree class if his or her average marks are close to (or the median of their weighted marks achieves) the higher class, and if they have submitted several pieces of work worthy of the higher class. However, even students with a high average mark may be unable to take honours if they have failed part of the course and so have insufficient credits.

text: In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, a bachelor's degree with honours normally takes three years of full-time study and usually requires 360 credits, of which at least 90 are at level 6 (final year of a bachelor's degree) level, while an ordinary bachelor's degree normally requires 300 credits, of which 60 are at level 6.[6] In Scotland, the honours bachelor's degree takes four years and requires 480 credits with a minimum of 90 at level 10 of the Scottish framework (last year of the honours degree) and 90 at level 9 (penultimate year), while the ordinary degree takes three years and requires 360 credits with a minimum of 60 at level 9 (last year of the ordinary degree).[7]

text: In Scotland, it is possible to start university a year younger than in the rest of the United Kingdom, as the Scottish Higher exams are often taken at age 16 or 17 (as opposed to 18), so Scottish students often end a four-year course at the same age as a student from elsewhere in the UK taking a three-year course, assuming no gap years.

text: When a candidate is awarded a degree with honours, "(Hons)" may be suffixed to their designatory letters — for example, BA (Hons), BSc (Hons), BMus (Hons), MA (Hons).[8] An MA (Hons) would generally indicate a degree award from certain Scottish universities (c.f. Scottish MA) and is at the same level as a bachelor's degree.

text: Distribution of classes[edit]

text: The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) has published the number of degrees awarded with different classifications since 1994/5. The relative proportions of different classes have changed over this period, with increasing numbers of students being awarded higher honours. The table below shows the percentage of classified degrees (i.e. not including fails or unclassified degrees such as MBBS) in each class at five year intervals; note that HESA stopped giving statistics separately for third class honours and pass degree after 2003 and that a small number of undivided second class honours degrees (shown under "other" along with "unknown", which makes up the bulk of this category) were awarded up to 1996.

text:
Class
1995[9]
2000[10]
2005[11]
2010[12]
2015[13]

1st
7.0
8.2
11.6
14.4
22.0

2:1
40.3
42.9
47.4
48.3
49.5

2:2
34.8
34.0
33.1
29.8
23.0

3rd
5.8
5.3
8.0
7.5
5.5

Pass
11.7
9.6

Other
0.3[14]
–
–
–
–

text: First-class honours[edit]

text: First-class honours, referred to as a "first", is the highest honours classification and indicates high academic achievement.

text: In 2010 and 2011, the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) reported that approximately 15% of all degree candidates graduated with first-class honours.[15][16] The percentages of graduates achieving a first vary greatly by university and course studied.[17] For example, students of law are least likely to gain a first, whereas students of mathematical sciences are most likely to gain a first.[18] In 2006–2007 and 2010–2011, 5.8% and 8.1% of law students gained a first, respectively; however, in those years, 28.9% and 30.0% of mathematics students gained a first, respectively.[18]

text: A first class honours degree is sometimes known as a 'Geoff' or 'Damien' after Geoff Hurst or Damien Hirst.[19]

text: Upper second-class honours [edit]

text: The upper division is commonly abbreviated to "2:1" or "II.i" (pronounced two-one). The 2:1 is a minimum requirement for entry to many postgraduate courses in the UK. It is also required for the award of a research council postgraduate studentship in the UK, although possession of a master's degree can render a candidate eligible for an award if their initial degree was below the 2:1 standard. The percentage of candidates who achieve upper second-class honours can vary widely by degree subject, as well as by university.[16]

text: An upper second class honours degree might be referred to as 'Attila' or 'Don' after 'Attila the Hun' and 'Don Juan'.[19]

text: Lower second-class honours[edit]

text: This is the second division of second-class degrees and is abbreviated as "2:2" or "II.ii" (pronounced two-two).

text: It has been colloquially referred to in rhyming slang as a ''Desmond" - after South African social rights activist and retired Anglican archbishop Desmond Tutu (although Tutu himself graduated with an upper second-class honours degree[20]).[21][19]

text: Third-class honours[edit]

text: Third-class honours, referred to as a "third", is the lowest honours classification in most modern universities. Historically, the University of Oxford awarded fourth-class honours degrees and, until the late 1970s, did not distinguish between upper and lower second-class honours degrees.[22]

text: Informally, the third-class honours degree is referred to as a "gentleman's degree" (cf. the "gentleman's C" in the U.S.).[23]

text: It has been colloquially known in rhyming slang as a 'Douglas' – after Douglas Hurd, the former Conservative MP (who in reality took first class honours)[19] , or a 'Richard' - after King Richard III.

text: Approximately 7.2% of students graduating in 2006 with an honours degree received a third-class honours.[16]

text: Ordinary degree[edit]

text: While most university bachelor's degree courses lead to honours degrees, some universities offer courses leading to ordinary degrees.[24] Some honours courses permit students who do not gain sufficient credits in a year by a small margin to transfer to a parallel ordinary degree course. Ordinary degrees may also sometimes be awarded to honours degree students who do not pass sufficient credits in their final year to gain an honours degree, but pass enough to earn an ordinary degree.[25]

text: Some Scottish universities offer three-year ordinary degrees as a qualification in their own right, as well as an honours degree over four years. This is in contrast to English universities that have honours degrees with three years of study. An ordinary degree in Scotland is not a failed honours degree, as in certain English universities. Students can decide, usually at the end of their second or third year, whether or not they wish to complete a fourth honours year. Scottish universities may also award their ordinary degrees with distinction if a student achieves a particularly good grade average, usually 70% or above. A common example of a Scottish ordinary degree is the Bachelor of Laws course taken by graduates of other subjects, as this is sufficient (without honours) for entry into the legal profession.

text: Aegrotat[edit]

text: An aegrotat (/ˈiːɡroʊtæt/; from Latin aegrotat, meaning 'he is ill')[26] degree is an honours or ordinary degree without classification, awarded under the presumption that, had a candidate who was unable to undertake their exams due to illness or even death completed those exams, they would have satisfied the standard required for that degree.[27][28][29][30][31] Aegrotat degrees are often qualified with an appended "(aegrotat)".

text: Following the introduction of current regulations regarding mitigating circumstances, aegrotat degrees are less commonly awarded than they previously were.[32]

text: Variations in classification[edit]

text: At the University of Cambridge, undergraduate Tripos examinations are split into three parts (e.g. Part IA, IB, and II), or two parts (Part I and II). Part II is taken at the end of final year. Each student receives a formal classification for each part (i.e. Class I, II.I, II.II, or III).[33] Typically, the Part II grade that corresponds with final examinations is quoted, however officially a grade simply exists for every Part of the degree, not for the overall degree.

text: At the University of Oxford, a formal degree Class is given, and this is typically based on the final examinations. In Oxford, examinations for Prelims or Honour Moderations are also undertaken in first/second year, however these results do not typically affect the final degree classification. Until the 1970s, the four honours divisions in Oxford's moderations and final examinations were named first, second, third and fourth class, but eventually Oxford gave in and adopted the numbering used by other English universities.[22]

text: Variations of first-class honours[edit]

text: At the University of Cambridge, Triposes were previously split into two parts: Part I and Part II. Attaining First Class Honours in both parts would culminate in graduating with a "Double First".[33] Most Triposes were later split into three parts: "Part IA," "Part IB" and "Part II", or "Part I", "Part IIA" and "Part IIB". Attaining a First Class in all three parts culminates in graduating with a "Triple First".[34][35][36][37][38][39] The frequency of this honour varies with subject, however typically fewer than 3% of students will achieve this distinction. It is possible in some of the humanities Triposes to be awarded a "Starred First".[40] The science Triposes do not award Starred Firsts.

text: Oxford sometimes grants a congratulatory first, which The New York Times described as "a highly unusual honor in which the examining professors ask no questions about the candidate's written work but simply stand and applaud",[41] and Martin Amis described as "the sort where you are called in for a viva and the examiners tell you how much they enjoyed reading your papers".[42] A "double first" at Oxford usually informally refers to first-class honours in both components of an undergraduate degree, i.e. Moderations/Prelims and the Final Honour School, or in both the bachelor's and master's components of an integrated master's degree.

text: At University College London, candidates who perform well beyond the requirements of a standard First Class Honours may be nominated to the Dean's List. This is generated once per year and recognizes outstanding academic achievement in final examinations. There are no set criteria for nomination to the list, but typically only a nominal number of students from each faculty are nominated per year.[43]

text: International comparisons[edit]

text: France[edit]

text: The University of St Andrews gives equivalences between French and British grades for its study-abroad programme.[44] Equivalencies for the purposes of initial teacher training have also been derived by the UK NARIC for 1st, 2:1 and 2:2 degrees, which do not align with St Andrews' table.[45]

text:
British class
French grade range (St Andrews)
French grade range (UK NARIC)

First
15–20
16+

Upper Second
12–14
13+

Lower Second
10–11
12+

Third
7–9
–

Pass
6
–

text: South Africa[edit]

text: The South African Qualifications Authority [46] (SAQA) compares international degrees with local degrees before any international student continues their studies in that country. While the British degree accreditation and classification system allows students to go straight from a three-year bachelor's degree onto a master's degree (normally requiring a 1st or a 2:1 – those with a 2:2 or a 3rd usually require appropriate professional experience),[47] South Africa does not do so unless the student has proven research capabilities. South African Honours degrees prepare the students to undertake a research-specific degree (in terms of master's), by spending an in-depth year (up to 5 modules) creating research proposals and undertaking a research project of limited scope. This prepares students for the research degrees later in their academic career.

text: Spain[edit]

text: The UK NARIC has derived equivalencies for the grades of the Spanish grado and licenciatura degrees for purposes of initial teacher training bursaries.[45]

text:
British class
Spanish equivalent

First
8.5+

Upper Second
7+

Lower Second
6 +

text: The Netherlands[edit]

text: The Netherlands organisation for international cooperation in higher education (NUFFIC) has compared UK degree classification to Dutch degree grades.[48] Dutch equivalencies have also been calculated by the UK NARIC.[45]

text:
British class
Dutch equivalent (NUFFIC)
Dutch equivalent (UK NARIC)

First
8-10
8.5+

Upper Second
7 to 8
6.5+

Lower Second
6 to 7
6+

Third
5.5 to 6
–

text: Nuffic also noted that the grading culture is different in the Netherlands, so that it is very rare for even the smartest students in the Netherlands to be awarded a 9 or a 10, which represent near perfection and absolute perfection.[48]

text: United States and Canada[edit]

text: British honours degrees are sometimes considered equivalent (by British sources) to a US master's degree, with the US bachelor's degree being equivalent to a British pass degree, due to the much higher degree of specialisation in the UK.[49][50] However, many British institutions accept US bachelor's degrees for admission to postgraduate study (see below) and US comparison services treat British and American degrees as equivalent.[51] When US bachelor's degrees are compared to British honours degrees, equivalencies can be expressed in terms of either US Grade Point Averages (GPAs) or letter grades.

text: British institutions normally state equivalence in terms of GPAs. Approximate mappings between British classifications and GPAs can be inferred from the graduate admissions criteria used by British universities, which often give international equivalents. For example, University College London (UCL) equates the minimum classification for entrance to GPAs using 1st = 3.6, 2:1 = 3.3 and 2:2 = 3.0.[52] However, different universities convert grades differently: the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) considers a GPA (U.S.) of 3.5 or better as equivalent to gaining a 2:1,[53] while the department of English Language and Literature at Oxford considers a GPA of "about 3.8" equivalent to a first class degree.[54] Similarly, the UK NARIC gives equivalent GPAs for determining eligibility for teacher training bursaries.[45] In contrast, Durham University's North American Undergraduate Guide 2017 gives a conversion table as a guide to understanding British classifications (rather than for admission to postgraduate study) of 1st = 3.8–4.0, 2:1 = 3.3–3.7, 2:2 = 2.8–3.2 and 3rd = 2.3–2.7.[55] The GPA conversions are summarised in the following table:

text:
British Degree Classification
US GPA Equivalent (UCL)[52]
US GPA Equivalent (Durham)[55]
US GPA Equivalent (NARIC)[45]
US GPA Equivalent (Other)

First
3.6+
3.8–4.0
3.7+
3.8+ (Oxford)[54]

Upper Second
3.3+
3.3–3.7
3.2+
3.5+ (LSE)[53]

Lower Second
3.0+
2.8–3.2
2.6+
–

Third
–
2.3–2.7
–
–

text: Letter grade equivalents are more commonly used by American institutions. World Education Services (WES),[56] a nonprofit organisation which provides qualification conversion services to many universities and employers, gives 1st = A, 2:1 = A-/B+, 2:2 = B, 3rd = B-, Pass = C, which would convert British degrees to higher GPAs than the conversion used by UCL if the guidelines for converting grades to GPA given by Duke University[57] are used. The Fulbright Commission has also created "an unofficial chart with approximate grade conversions between UK results and US GPA."[58]

text:
British Degree Classification
US Grade Equivalent (Fulbright)[58]
US GPA Equivalent (Fulbright)[58]
US Grade Equivalent (WES)[56]
Equivalent GPA to WES Grades (Duke)[57]

First
A
4.00
A
4.0

Upper Second
A-/B+
3.33–3.67
A-/B+
3.7/3.3

Lower Second
B
3.00
B
3.0

Third
C+
2.30
B-
2.7

Pass
C
2.00
C
2.0

text: Canadian academic grades may be given as letters, percentages, 12-point GPAs or 4-point GPAs. The 4-point GPAs are sometimes seen to differ from the US but other sources treat them as equivalent. The Durham conversion specifies GPAs for the US and letter grades/percentages for Canada [55] while the UK NARIC has separate GPA conversions for the four-year bachelor's honours, baccalauréat and professional bachelor's degrees (which differ from their US GPA equivalents by at most 0.1) and the three-year bachelor's degree (which is seen as a lower standard).[45] The British Graduate Admissions Fact Sheet from McGill University uses the conversion 1st = 4.0; 2:1 = 3.0; 2:2 = 2.7; 3rd = 2.0; Pass = 1.0; Fail = 0.0.[59]

text:
British Degree Classification
Canadian Equivalent (Durham)[55]
Canadian 4-year (Bachelor Honours degree) GPA Equivalent (NARIC)[45]
Canadian 3-year (Bachelor's degree) GPA Equivalent (NARIC)[45]
Canadian GPA Equivalent (McGill)[59]

Percentage
Letter
GPA
Percentage
Letter
12-point
GPA
Percentage
Letter
12-point

First
85%+
A – A+
3.7+
73%
A-
10
3.9+
90%
A
12
4.0

Upper Second
77% – 84%
B+ – A-
3.1+
73%
B
8
3.5+
80%
B+
10
3.0

Lower Second
67% – 76%
C+ – B-
2.5
62%
C+
6
3.1
73%
B
8
2.7

Third
60% - 66%
–
–
–
2.0

Pass
–
–
–
1.0

text: Degrees in the UK are mapped to levels of the Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies (FHEQ), which includes the Framework for Qualifications of Higher Education Institutes in Scotland (FQHEIS), which has an alternative numbering of levels corresponding to those of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). Bachelor's degrees (including the Scottish MA, but not including medical degrees, dentistry degrees or degrees in veterinary science) attained in the UK are at FHEQ level 6/FQHEIS level 9 (ordinary) or 10 (honours); master's degrees (including integrated master's degrees and first degrees in medicine, dentistry and veterinary science) are at FHEQ level 7/FQHEIS level 11, and doctoral degrees are at FHEQ level 8/FQHEIS level 12. Bachelor's, master's and doctoral degrees map to first, second and third cycle qualifications in the Qualifications Framework of the European Higher Education Area.[60][61]

text: Progression to postgraduate study[edit]

text: Regulations governing the progression of undergraduate degree graduates to postgraduate programmes vary among universities, and are often flexible. A candidate for a postgraduate master's degree is usually required to have at least a 2:2 bachelor honours degree, although candidates with 2:1s are in a considerably stronger position to gain a place in a postgraduate course and to obtain funding, especially in medical and natural sciences. Some institutions specify a 2:1 minimum for certain types of master's program, such as for a Master of Research course.[62][63]

text: Candidates with a Third or an Ordinary degree are sometimes accepted, provided they have acquired satisfactory professional experience subsequent to graduation. A candidate for a doctoral programme who does not hold a master's degree is nearly always required to have a First or 2:1 at bachelor's level.

text: Variations[edit]

text: International degrees[edit]

text: Australia[edit]

text: Some universities, such as those in Australia, offer ordinary or pass degrees, (for instance, as a three-year B.A. or a three-year BSc) by default. High-achieving students may be recognised with an honours classification without further coursework or research, as is often the case in engineering, which often contains a research and thesis component,[64][65] or law.[66] However, other courses (such as humanities, arts, social sciences, and sciences) and other universities may recognise high-achieving students with an honours classification with further coursework or research, undertaken either concurrently with, and as part of or in addition to, a bachelor's course,[67] or after completion of a bachelor's course requirements and attaining adequately competitive grades.[68][69]

text: Some graduate degrees have been or are classified;[70] however, under the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), no graduate-level degrees (i.e., master's by coursework, master's by research, or higher research degrees) may be classified. To comply with this standard, some institutions have commenced, or will commence, offering high-achieving graduates with "distinction".[71] Notably, this is consistent with British graduate degree classification.[72]

text: British medical and dental degrees[edit]

text: In the United Kingdom, medicine is usually taught as an undergraduate course, with graduates being awarded a master's level qualification: normally the conjoined degrees of Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS, BM BCh, MB ChB, etc.) although at Queen's University Belfast (and universities in Ireland) Bachelor in the Art of Obstetrics (BAO) is added, and at some universities only the Bachelor of Medicine is awarded - all of these have equal standing. Unlike most undergraduate degrees, the MBBS is not normally considered an honours degree, and thus is not classified into first class honours, etc. Students may be awarded "Merits" and "Distinctions" for parts of the course or the whole course (depending on the institution) and "Honours" may be awarded at some institutions for exceptional performance throughout the course (as a grade above Distinction).[73][74]

text: Medical schools split their year groups into one of 10 deciles. These deciles are the major factor in the calculation of Educational Performance Measure (EPM) points used as part of medical students' Foundation Programme applications, with the top decile receiving 43 points, decreasing by a point for each decile (so the lowest gets 34 points); 7 points can be awarded for other educational achievements (other degrees and publications), and the EPM points are combined with up to 50 points from the Situational Judgement Test to give a total out of 100.[75][76]

text: British Grade Point Average[edit]

text: Following the recommendation of the Burgess report into the honours degree classification system in 2007, the Higher Education Academy ran a pilot in 2013–2014 in collaboration with 21 institutions delivering higher education (ranging from Russell Group universities to Further Education colleges) to investigate how a Grade Point Average (GPA) system would work best in Britain. Two main weighting systems were tested: an American-style average of all marks, weighted only by credit value, and weighting by "exit velocity" in the manner of the honours classification, where modules in the first year are given a low or zero weight and modules in the final year have a higher weight (a third model was only rarely used). Over two thirds of providers preferred exit-velocity weighting to the straight average.[77]

text: A GPA scale, tied to percentage marks and letter grades, was recommended for use nationally following the study, to run in parallel with the honours degree classification system.[77]

text:
Percentage
Grade
Grade points

75–100
A+
4.25

71–74
A
4.00

67–70
A-
3.75

64–66
B+
3.50

61–63
B
3.25

57–60
B-
3.00

54–56
C+
2.75

50–53
C
2.50

48–49
C-
2.25

43–47
D+
2.00

40–42
D
1.50

38–39
D-
1.00

35–37
F+
0.75

30–34
F
0.50

0–29
F-
0.00


document_title: List of National Basketball Association annual steals leaders

question_text: who led the nba in steals last year

question_tokens: who led the nba in steals last year

text: Key[edit]

text:
^
Denotes player who is still active in the NBA

*
Inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame

Player (X)
Denotes the number of times the player had been the
steals leader up to and including that season

G
Guard
F
Forward
C
Center

text: Steal leaders[edit]

text:
Season
Player
Position[a]
Team
Games
played
Total steals
Steals per game
References

1973–74
Steele, LarryLarry Steele
G/F
Portland Trail Blazers
81
217
2.68
[4][5]

1974–75
Barry, RickRick Barry*
F
Golden State Warriors
80
228
2.85
[6][7]

1975–76
Watts, Don "Slick"Don "Slick" Watts
G
Seattle SuperSonics
82
261
3.18
[8][9]

1976–77
Buse, DonDon Buse
G
Indiana Pacers
81
281
3.47
[10][11]

1977–78
Lee, RonRon Lee
G
Phoenix Suns
82
225
2.74
[12][13]

1978–79
Carr, M. L.M. L. Carr[b]
G
Detroit Pistons
80
197
2.46
[14][15]

1979–80
Richardson, Micheal RayMicheal Ray Richardson
G/F
New York Knicks
82
265
3.23
[16][17]

1980–81
Johnson, MagicMagic Johnson*[c]
G/F
Los Angeles Lakers
37
127
3.43
[18][19]

1981–82
Johnson, MagicMagic Johnson* (2)[d]
G/F
Los Angeles Lakers
78
208
2.67
[19][20]

1982–83
Richardson, Micheal RayMicheal Ray Richardson (2)[e]
G/F
Golden State Warriors
New Jersey Nets
64
182
2.84
[17][21]

1983–84
Green, RickeyRickey Green
G
Utah Jazz
81
215
2.65
[22][23]

1984–85
Richardson, Micheal RayMicheal Ray Richardson (3)
G/F
New Jersey Nets
82
243
2.96
[17][24]

1985–86
Robertson, AlvinAlvin Robertson
G
San Antonio Spurs
82
301
3.67
[25][26]

1986–87
Robertson, AlvinAlvin Robertson (2)
G
San Antonio Spurs
81
260
3.21
[26][27]

1987–88
Jordan, MichaelMichael Jordan*
G
Chicago Bulls
82
259
3.16
[28][29]

1988–89
Stockton, JohnJohn Stockton*
G
Utah Jazz
82
263
3.21
[30][31]

1989–90
Jordan, MichaelMichael Jordan* (2)
G
Chicago Bulls
82
227
2.77
[29][32]

1990–91
Robertson, AlvinAlvin Robertson (3)
G
Milwaukee Bucks
81
246
3.04
[26][33]

1991–92
Stockton, JohnJohn Stockton* (2)
G
Utah Jazz
82
244
2.98
[31][34]

1992–93
Jordan, MichaelMichael Jordan* (3)
G
Chicago Bulls
78
221
2.83
[29][35]

1993–94
McMillan, NateNate McMillan
G
Seattle SuperSonics
73
216
2.96
[36][37]

1994–95
Pippen, ScottieScottie Pippen*
F
Chicago Bulls
79
232
2.94
[38][39]

1995–96
Payton, GaryGary Payton*
G
Seattle SuperSonics
81
231
2.85
[40][41]

1996–97
Blaylock, MookieMookie Blaylock
G
Atlanta Hawks
78
212
2.72
[42][43]

1997–98
Blaylock, MookieMookie Blaylock (2)[f]
G
Atlanta Hawks
70
183
2.61
[43][44]

1998–99[g]
Gill, KendallKendall Gill
G
New Jersey Nets
50
134
2.68
[46][47]

1999–00
Jones, EddieEddie Jones
G/F
Charlotte Hornets
72
192
2.67
[48][49]

2000–01
Iverson, AllenAllen Iverson*[h]
G
Philadelphia 76ers
71
178
2.51
[50][51]

2001–02
Iverson, AllenAllen Iverson* (2)[i]
G
Philadelphia 76ers
60
168
2.80
[51][52]

2002–03
Iverson, AllenAllen Iverson* (3)
G
Philadelphia 76ers
82
225
2.74
[51][53]

2003–04
Davis, BaronBaron Davis[j]
G
New Orleans Hornets
67
158
2.36
[54][55]

2004–05
Hughes, LarryLarry Hughes[k]
G
Washington Wizards
61
176
2.89
[56][57]

2005–06
Wallace, GeraldGerald Wallace^[l]
F
Charlotte Bobcats
55
138
2.51
[58][59]

2006–07
Davis, BaronBaron Davis (2)[m]
G
Golden State Warriors
63
135
2.14
[55][60]

2007–08
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^
G
New Orleans Hornets
80
217
2.71
[61][62]

2008–09
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^ (2)
G
New Orleans Hornets
78
216
2.77
[62]

2009–10
Rondo, RajonRajon Rondo^
G
Boston Celtics
81
189
2.33
[63]

2010–11
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^ (3)
G
New Orleans Hornets
80
188
2.35
[62]

2011–12[n]
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^ (4)
G
Los Angeles Clippers
60
152
2.53
[62]

2012–13
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^ (5)[o]
G
Los Angeles Clippers
70
169
2.41
[62]

2013–14
Paul, ChrisChris Paul^ (6)[p]
G
Los Angeles Clippers
62
154
2.48
[62]

2014–15
Leonard, KawhiKawhi Leonard^ [q]
F
San Antonio Spurs
64
148
2.31
[67]

2015–16
Curry, StephenStephen Curry^
G
Golden State Warriors
79
169
2.14
[68]

2016–17
Green, DraymondDraymond Green^
F
Golden State Warriors
76
154
2.03
[69]

text: Multiple-time leaders[edit]

text:
Ranking
Player
Team
Times leader
Years

1
Chris Paul
New Orleans Hornets (3) / Los Angeles Clippers (3)
6
2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2
Allen Iverson
Michael Jordan
Micheal Ray Richardson
Alvin Robertson
Philadelphia 76ers
Chicago Bulls
New York Knicks (1) / Golden State Warriors / New Jersey Nets (1) / New Jersey Nets (1)
San Antonio Spurs (2) / Milwaukee Bucks (1)
3
2001, 2002, 2003
1988, 1990, 1993
1980, 1983, 1985
1986, 1987, 1991

3
Mookie Blaylock
Baron Davis
Magic Johnson
John Stockton
Atlanta Hawks
New Orleans Hornets (1) / Golden State Warriors (1)
Los Angeles Lakers
Utah Jazz
2
1997, 1998
2004, 2007
1981, 1982
1989, 1992

text: Notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ The player's primary position is listed first.
Jump up ^ In the 1978–79 season, Eddie Jordan and Norm Nixon both had the highest steal total (201) but they were tied for second in steal average (2.45).[14]
Jump up ^ In the 1980–81 season, Magic Johnson had only played in 37 games and ranked seventeenth in steal total. Micheal Ray Richardson had the highest total (232).[18]
Jump up ^ In the 1981–82 season, Maurice Cheeks had the highest steal total (209) but was second in steal average (2.65).[20]
Jump up ^ In the 1982–83 season, Micheal Ray Richardson had only played in 64 games and ranked sixth in steal total. Rickey Green had the highest total (220).[21]
Jump up ^ In the 1997–98 season, Mookie Blaylock had only played in 70 games and ranked fourth in steal total. Brevin Knight had the highest total (196).[44]
Jump up ^ The 1998–99 season was shortened to 50 games due to the league's lockout.[45] The qualification of this season's steal title is to appear in at least 43 games (out of 50) or to have at least 76 steals.[3]
Jump up ^ In the 2000–01 season, Doug Christie had the highest steal total (183) but was third in steal average (2.26).[50]
Jump up ^ In the 2001–02 season, Jason Kidd had the highest steal total (175) but was third in steal average (2.13).[52]
Jump up ^ In the 2003–04 season, Shawn Marion had the highest steal total (167) but was second in steal average (2.11).[54]
Jump up ^ In the 2004–05 season, Allen Iverson had the highest steal total (180) but was second in steal average (2.40).[56]
Jump up ^ In the 2005–06 season, Gerald Wallace had only played in 55 games and ranked tenth in steal total. Chris Paul had the highest total (175).[58]
Jump up ^ In the 2006–07 season, Baron Davis had only played in 63 games and ranked sixth in steal total. Shawn Marion had the highest total (156).[60]
Jump up ^ The 2011–12 season was shortened to 66 games due to the league's lockout.[64] The qualification of this season's scoring title is to appear in at least 57 games (out of 66) or to have at least 101 steals.[3]
Jump up ^ In the 2012–13 season, Mike Conley, Jr. had the highest steal total (174) but was third in steal average (2.2).[65]
Jump up ^ In the 2013–14 season, Ricky Rubio and Thaddeus Young both had higher steal totals (190 and 167 respectively) but they were second and third in steal average (2.3 and 2.1), respectively.[66]
Jump up ^ In the 2014–15 season, Stephen Curry had the highest steal total (163) but was third in steal average tied with Tony Allen (2.0).


document_title: Phonological development

question_text: when a young infant hears the same sound over and over such as ba-ba-ba- what will happen

question_tokens: when a young infant hears the same sound over and over such as ba-ba-ba - what will happen

text: Phonological development

text: Prelinguistic development (birth – 1 year)[edit]

text: Perception[edit]

text: Children don’t utter their first words until they are about 1 year old, but already at birth they can tell some utterances in their native language from utterances in languages with different prosodic features.[3]

text: 1 month[edit]

text: Categorical perception[edit]

text: Infants as young as 1 month perceive some speech sounds as speech categories (they display categorical perception of speech). For example, the sounds /b/ and /p/ differ in the amount of breathiness that follows the opening of the lips. Using a computer generated continuum in breathiness between /b/ and /p/, Eimas et al. (1971) showed that English-learning infants paid more attention to differences near the boundary between /b/ and /p/ than to equal-sized differences within the /b/-category or within the /p/-category.[4] Their measure, monitoring infant sucking-rate, became a major experimental method for studying infant speech perception.

text: Infants up to 10–12 months can distinguish not only native sounds but also nonnative contrasts. Older children and adults lose the ability to discriminate some nonnative contrasts.[5] Thus, it seems that exposure to one’s native language causes the perceptual system to be restructured. The restructuring reflects the system of contrasts in the native language.

text: 4 months[edit]

text: At four months infants still prefer infant-directed speech to adult-directed speech. Whereas 1-month-olds only exhibit this preference if the full speech signal is played to them, 4-month-old infants prefer infant-directed speech even when just the pitch contours are played.[6] This shows that between 1 and 4 months of age, infants improve in tracking the suprasegmental information in the speech directed at them. By 4 months, finally, infants have learned which features they have to pay attention to at the suprasegmental level.

text: 5 months[edit]

text: Babies prefer to hear their own name to similar-sounding words.[7] It is possible that they have associated the meaning “me” with their name, although it is also possible that they simply recognize the form because of its high frequency.

text: 6 months[edit]

text: With increasing exposure to the ambient language, infants learn not to pay attention to sound distinctions that are not meaningful in their native language, e.g., two acoustically different versions of the vowel /i/ that simply differ because of inter-speaker variability. By 6 months of age infants have learned to treat acoustically different sounds that are representations of the same sound category, such as an /i/ spoken by a male versus a female speaker, as members of the same phonological category /i/.[8]

text: Statistical learning[edit]

text: Infants are able to extract meaningful distinctions in the language they are exposed to from statistical properties of that language. For example, if English-learning infants are exposed to a prevoiced /d/ to voiceless unaspirated /t/ continuum (similar to the /d/ - /t/ distinction in Spanish) with the majority of the tokens occurring near the endpoints of the continuum, i.e., showing extreme prevoicing versus long voice onset times (bimodal distribution) they are better at discriminating these sounds than infants who are exposed primarily to tokens from the center of the continuum (unimodal distribution).[9]

text: These results show that at the age of 6 months infants are sensitive to how often certain sounds occur in the language they are exposed to and they can learn which cues are important to pay attention to from these differences in frequency of occurrence. In natural language exposure this means typical sounds in a language (such as prevoiced /d/ in Spanish) occur often and infants can learn them from mere exposure to them in the speech they hear. All of this occurs before infants are aware of the meaning of any of the words they are exposed to, and therefore the phenomenon of statistical learning has been used to argue for the fact that infants can learn sound contrasts without meaning being attached to them.

text: At 6 months, infants are also able to make use of prosodic features of the ambient language to break the speech stream they are exposed to into meaningful units, e.g., they are better able to distinguish sounds that occur in stressed vs. unstressed syllables.[10] This means that at 6 months infants have some knowledge of the stress patterns in the speech they are exposed and they have learned that these patterns are meaningful.

text: 7 months[edit]

text: At 7.5 months English-learning infants have been shown to be able to segment words from speech that show a strong-weak (i.e., trochaic) stress pattern, which is the most common stress pattern in the English language, but they were not able to segment out words that follow a weak-strong pattern. In the sequence ‘guitar is’ these infants thus heard ‘taris’ as the word-unit because it follows a strong-weak pattern.[11] The process that allows infants to use prosodic cues in speech input to learn about language structure has been termed “prosodic bootstrapping”.[12]

text: 8 months[edit]

text: While children generally don’t understand the meaning of most single words yet, they understand the meaning of certain phrases they hear a lot, such as “Stop it,” or “Come here.”[13]

text: 9 months[edit]

text: Infants can distinguish native from nonnative language input using phonetic and phonotactic patterns alone, i.e., without the help of prosodic cues.[14] They seem to have learned their native language’s phonotactics, i.e., which combinations of sounds are possible in the language.

text: 10-12 months[edit]

text: Infants now can no longer discriminate most nonnative sound contrasts that fall within the same sound category in their native language.[15] Their perceptual system has been tuned to the contrasts relevant in their native language. As for word comprehension, Fenson et al. (1994) tested 10-11-month-old children’s comprehension vocabulary size and found a range from 11 words to 154 words.[13] At this age, children normally have not yet begun to speak and thus have no production vocabulary. So clearly, comprehension vocabulary develops before production vocabulary.

text: Production[edit]

text: Stages of pre-speech vocal development[edit]

text: Even though children do not produce their first words until they are approximately 12 months old, the ability to produce speech sounds starts to develop at a much younger age. Stark (1980) distinguishes five stages of early speech development:[16]

text: 0-6 weeks: Reflexive vocalizations[edit]

text: These earliest vocalizations include crying and vegetative sounds such as breathing, sucking or sneezing. For these vegetative sounds, infants’ vocal cords vibrate and air passes through their vocal apparatus, thus familiarizing infants with processes involved in later speech production.

text: 6-16 weeks: Cooing and laughter[edit]

text: Infants produce cooing sounds when they are content. Cooing is often triggered by social interaction with caregivers and resembles the production of vowels.

text: 16-30 weeks: Vocal play[edit]

text: Infants produce a variety of vowel- and consonant-like sounds that they combine into increasingly longer sequences. The production of vowel sounds (already in the first 2 months) precedes the production of consonants, with the first back consonants (e.g., [g], [k]) being produced around 2–3 months, and front consonants (e.g., [m], [n], [p]) starting to appear around 6 months of age. As for pitch contours in early infant utterances, infants between 3 and 9 months of age produce primarily flat, falling and rising-falling contours. Rising pitch contours would require the infants to raise subglottal pressure during the vocalization or to increase vocal fold length or tension at the end of the vocalization, or both. At 3 to 9 months infants don’t seem to be able to control these movements yet.[17]

text: 6-10 months: Reduplicated babbling (or canonical babbling[18])[edit]

text: Reduplicated babbling contains consonant-vowel (CV) syllables that are repeated in reduplicated series of the same consonant and vowel (e.g., [bababa]). At this stage, infants’ productions resemble speech much more closely in timing and vocal behaviors than at earlier stages. Starting around 6 months babies also show an influence of the ambient language in their babbling, i.e., babies’ babbling sounds different depending on which languages they hear. For example, French learning 9-10 month-olds have been found to produce a bigger proportion of prevoiced stops (which exist in French but not English) in their babbling than English learning infants of the same age.[19] This phenomenon of babbling being influenced by the language being acquired has been called babbling drift.[20]

text: 10-14 months: Nonreduplicated babbling (or variegated babbling[18])[edit]

text: Infants now combine different vowels and consonants into syllable strings. At this stage, infants also produce various stress and intonation patterns. During this transitional period from babbling to the first word children also produce “protowords”, i.e., invented words that are used consistently to express specific meanings, but that are not real words in the children’s target language.[21] Around 12–14 months of age children produce their first word. Infants close to one year of age are able to produce rising pitch contours in addition to flat, falling, and rising-falling pitch contours.[17]

text: Development once speech sets in (1 year and older)[edit]

text: At the age of 1, children only just begin to speak, and their utterances are not adult-like yet at all. Children’s perceptual abilities are still developing, too. In fact, both production and perception abilities continue to develop well into the school years, with the perception of some prosodic features not being fully developed until about 12 years of age.

text: Perception[edit]

text: 14 months[edit]

text: Children are able to distinguish newly learned ‘words’ associated with objects if they are not similar-sounding, such as ‘lif’ and ‘neem’. They cannot distinguish similar-sounding newly learned words such as ‘bih’ and ‘dih’, however.[22] So, while children at this age are able to distinguish monosyllabic minimal pairs at a purely phonological level, if the discrimination task is paired with word meaning, the additional cognitive load required by learning the word meanings leaves them unable to spend the extra effort on distinguishing the similar phonology.

text: 16 months[edit]

text: Children’s comprehension vocabulary size ranges from about 92 to 321 words.[13] The production vocabulary size at this age is typically around 50 words. This shows that comprehension vocabulary grows faster than production vocabulary.

text: 18-20 months[edit]

text: At 18–20 months infants can distinguish newly learned ‘words’, even if they are phonologically similar, e.g. ‘bih’ and ‘dih’.[22] While infants are able to distinguish syllables like these already soon after birth, only now are they able to distinguish them if they are presented to them as meaningful words rather than just a sequence of sounds. Children are also able to detect mispronunciations such as ‘vaby’ for ‘baby’. Recognition has been found to be poorer for mispronounced than for correctly pronounced words. This suggests that infants’ representations of familiar words are phonetically very precise.[23] This result has also been taken to suggest that infants move from a word-based to a segment-based phonological system around 18 months of age.

text: Fast-mapping[edit]

text: Of course, the reason why children need to learn the sound distinctions of their language is because then they also have to learn the meaning associated with those different sounds. Young children have a remarkable ability to learn meanings for the words they extract from the speech they are exposed to, i.e., to map meaning onto the sounds. Often children already associate a meaning with a new word after only one exposure. This is referred to as “fast mapping”. At 20 months of age, when presented with three familiar objects (e.g., a ball, a bottle and a cup) and one unfamiliar object (e.g., an egg piercer), children are able to conclude that in the request “Can I have the zib,” zib must refer to the unfamiliar object, i.e., the egg piercer, even if they have never heard that pseudoword before.[24][25] Children as young as 15 months can complete this task successfully if the experiment is conducted with fewer objects.[26] This task shows that children aged 15 to 20 months can assign meaning to a new word after only a single exposure. Fast mapping is a necessary ability for children to acquire the number of words they have to learn during the first few years of life: Children acquire an average of nine words per day between 18 months and 6 years of age.[27]

text: 2–6 years[edit]

text: At 2 years, infants show first signs of phonological awareness, i.e., they are interested in word play, rhyming, and alliterations.[1] Phonological awareness does continue to develop until the first years of school. For example, only about half of the 4- and 5-year olds tested by Liberman et al. (1974) were able to tap out the number of syllables in multisyllabic words, but 90% of the 6-year-olds were able to do so.[28] Most 3-4-year olds are able to break simple consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) syllables up into their constituents (onset and rime). The onset of a syllable consists of all the consonants preceding the syllable’s vowel, and the rime is made up of the vowel and all following consonants. For example, the onset in the word ‘dog’ is /d/ and the rime is /og/. Children at 3–4 years of age were able to tell that the nonwords /fol/ and /fir/ would be liked by a puppet whose favorite sound is /f/.[29][30] 4-year olds are less successful at this task if the onset of the syllable contains a consonant cluster, such as /fr/ or /fl/. Liberman et al. found that no 4-year-olds and only 17% of 5-year-olds were able to tap out the number of phonemes (individual sounds) in a word.[28] 70% of 6-year-olds were able to do so. This might mean that children are aware of syllables as units of speech early on, while they don’t show awareness of individual phonemes until school age. Another explanation is that individual sounds do not easily translate into beats, which makes clapping individual phonemes a much more difficult task than clapping syllables. One reason why phoneme awareness gets much better once children start school is because learning to read provides a visual aid as how to break up words into their smaller constituents.[1]

text: 12 years[edit]

text: Although children perceive rhythmic patterns in their native language at 7–8 months, they are not able to reliably distinguish compound words and phrases that differ only in stress placement, such as ‘HOT dog’ vs. ‘hot DOG’ until around 12 years of age. Children in a study by Vogel and Raimy (2002)[31] were asked to show which of two pictures (i.e., a dog or a sausage) was being named. Children younger than 12 years generally preferred the compound reading (i.e., the sausage) to the phrasal reading (the dog). The authors concluded from this that children start out with a lexical bias, i.e., they prefer to interpret phrases like these as single words, and the ability to override this bias develops until late in childhood.

text: Production[edit]

text: 12-14 months[edit]

text: Infants usually produce their first word around 12 –14 months of age. First words are simple in structure and contain the same sounds that were used in late babbling.[32] The lexical items they produce are probably stored as whole words rather than as individual segments that get put together online when uttering them. This is suggested by the fact that infants at this age may produce the same sounds differently in different words.[33]

text: 16 months[edit]

text: Children’s production vocabulary size at this age is typically around 50 words, although there is great variation in vocabulary size among children in the same age group, with a range between 0 and 160 words for the majority of children.[13]

text: 18 months[edit]

text: Children’s productions become more consistent around the age of 18 months.[32] When their words differ from adult forms, these differences are more systematic than before. These systematic transformations are referred to as “phonological processes”, and often resemble processes that are typically common in the adult phonologies of the world’s languages (cf. reduplication in adult Jamaican Creole: “yellow yellow” = “very yellow” [34]). Some common phonological processes are listed below.[1]

text: Whole word processes (until age 3 or 4)[edit]

text: - Weak syllable deletion: omission of an unstressed syllable in the target word, e.g., [nænæ] for ‘banana’

text: - Final consonant deletion: omission of the final consonant in the target word, e.g., [pikʌ] for ‘because’

text: - Reduplication: production of two identical syllables based on one of the target word syllables, e.g., [baba] for ‘bottle’

text: - Consonant harmony: a target word consonant takes on features of another target word consonant, e.g., [ɡʌk] for ‘duck’

text: - Consonant cluster reduction: omission of a consonant in a target word cluster, e.g., [kæk] for ‘cracker’

text: Segment substitution processes (into the early school years)[edit]

text: - Velar fronting: a velar is replaced by a coronal sound, e.g., [ti] for ‘key’

text: - Stopping: a fricative is replaced by a stop, e.g., [ti] for ‘sea’

text: - Gliding: a liquid is replaced by a glide, e.g., [wæbɪt] for ‘rabbit’

text: 2 years[edit]

text: The size of the production vocabulary ranges from about 50 to 550 words at the age of 2 years.[13] Influences on the rate of word learning, and thus on the wide range of vocabulary sizes of children of the same age, include the amount of speech children are exposed to by their caregivers as well as differences in how rich the vocabulary in the speech a child hears is. Children also seem to build up their vocabulary faster if the speech they hear is related to their focus of attention more often.[1][35] This would be the case if a caregiver talks about a ball the child is currently looking at.

text: 4 years[edit]

text: A study by Gathercole and Baddeley (1989) showed the importance of sound for early word meaning.[36] They tested the phonological memory of 4- and 5-year-old children, i.e., how well these children were able to remember a sequence of unfamiliar sounds. They found that children with better phonological memory also had larger vocabularies at both ages. Moreover, phonological memory at age 4 predicted the children’s vocabulary at age 5, even with earlier vocabulary and nonverbal intelligence factored out.

text: 7 years[edit]

text: Children produce mostly adult-like segments.[37] Their ability to produce complex sound sequences and multisyllabic words continues to improve throughout middle childhood.[32]

text: Biological foundations of infants’ speech development[edit]

text: The developmental changes in infants’ vocalizations over the first year of life are influenced by physical developments during that time. Physical growth of the vocal tract, brain development, and development of neurological structures responsible for vocalization are factors for the development of infants’ vocal productions.[1]

text: Infants’ vocal tract[edit]

text: Infants vocal tracts are smaller, and initially also shaped differently from adults’ vocal tracts. The infant’s tongue fills the entire mouth, thus reducing the range of movement. As the facial skeleton grows, the range for movement increases, which probably contributes to the increased variety of sounds infants start to produce. Development of muscles and sensory receptors also gives infants more control over sound production.[1] The limited movement possible by the infant jaw and mouth might be responsible for the typical consonant-vowel (CV) alternation in babbling and it has even been suggested that the predominance of CV syllables in the languages of the world might evolutionarily have been caused by this limited range of movements of the human vocal organs.[38]

text: The differences between the vocal tract of infants and adults can be seen in figure 3 (infants) and figure 4 (adults) below.

text: The nervous system[edit]

text: Crying and vegetative sounds are controlled by the brain stem, which matures earlier than the cortex. Neurological development of higher brain structures coincides with certain developments in infants’ vocalizations. For example, the onset of cooing at 6 to 8 weeks happens as some areas of the limbic system begin to function. The limbic system is known to be involved in the expression of emotion, and cooing in infants is associated with a feeling of contentedness. Further development of the limbic system might be responsible for the onset of laughter around 16 weeks of age. The motor cortex, finally, which develops later than the abovementioned structures may be necessary for canonical babbling, which start around 6 to 9 months of age.[1]


document_title: List of Olympic Games host cities

question_text: where is the next olympic games going to be held

text: List of Olympic Games host cities

text: Olympic host cities[edit]

text:
City
Country
Continent
Summer (Olympiad)
Winter
Year
Opening Ceremony
Closing Ceremony

Athens
 Greece
Europe
S005I
—
1896
000000002018-04-06-0000April 6
000000002018-04-15-0000April 15

Paris
 France
Europe
S005II
—
1900
000000002018-05-14-0000May 14
000000002018-10-28-0000October 28

St. Louis[a]
 United States
North America
S005III
—
1904
000000002018-07-01-0000July 1
000000002018-11-23-0000November 23

London[c]
 United Kingdom
Europe
S005IV
—
1908
000000002018-04-27-0000April 27
000000002018-10-31-0000October 31

Stockholm
 Sweden
Europe
S005V
—
1912
000000002018-05-05-0000May 5
000000002018-07-22-0000July 22

Berlin
 Germany
Europe
S006VI
—
1916
Cancelled due to WWI[4]

Antwerp[d]
 Belgium
Europe
S007VII
—
1920
000000002018-04-20-0000April 20
000000002018-09-12-0000September 12[5]

Chamonix
 France
Europe
—
W001I
1924
000000002018-01-25-0000January 25
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4[6]

Paris
 France
Europe
S008VIII
—
000000002018-05-04-0000May 4
000000002018-07-27-0000July 27[7]

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe
—
W002II
1928
000000002018-02-11-0000February 11
000000002018-02-19-0000February 19[8]

Amsterdam
 Netherlands
Europe
S009IX
—
000000002018-05-17-0000May 17
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12[9]

Lake Placid
 United States
North America
—
W003III
1932
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-15-0000February 15[10]

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S010X
—
000000002018-07-30-0000July 30
000000002018-08-14-0000August 14[11]

Garmisch-Partenkirchen
 Nazi Germany
Europe
—
W004IV
1936
000000002018-02-06-0000February 6
000000002018-02-16-0000February 16[12]

Berlin
 Nazi Germany
Europe
S011XI
—
000000002018-08-01-0000August 1
000000002018-08-16-0000August 16[13]

Sapporo
Garmisch-Partenkirchen[e]
 Empire of Japan
 Nazi Germany
Asia
Europe
—
W005aV
1940
Cancelled due to WWII[4]

Tokyo
Helsinki[f]
 Empire of Japan
 Finland
Asia
Europe
S012XII
—

Cortina d'Ampezzo
 Italy
Europe
—
W005bV
1944

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S013XIII
—

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe
—
W005cV
1948
000000002018-01-30-0000January 30
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S014XIV
—
000000002018-07-29-0000July 29
000000002018-08-14-0000August 14

Oslo
 Norway
Europe
—
W006VI
1952
000000002018-02-14-0000February 14
000000002018-02-25-0000February 25

Helsinki
 Finland
Europe
S015XV
—
000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-03-0000August 3

Cortina d'Ampezzo
 Italy
Europe
—
W007VII
1956
000000002018-01-26-0000January 26
000000002018-02-05-0000February 5

Melbourne
Stockholm[g]
 Australia
 Sweden
Oceania
Europe
S016XVI
—
000000002018-11-22-0000November 22
000000002018-06-10-0000June 10
000000002018-12-08-0000December 8
000000002018-06-17-0000June 17

Squaw Valley
 United States
North America
—
W008VIII
1960
000000002018-02-18-0000February 18
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

Rome
 Italy
Europe
S017XVII
—
000000002018-08-25-0000August 25
000000002018-09-11-0000September 11

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe
—
W009IX
1964
000000002018-01-29-0000January 29
000000002018-02-09-0000February 9

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
S018XVIII
—
000000002018-10-10-0000October 10
000000002018-10-24-0000October 24

Grenoble
 France
Europe
—
W010X
1968
000000002018-02-06-0000February 6
000000002018-02-18-0000February 18

Mexico City
 Mexico
North America
S019XIX
—
000000002018-10-12-0000October 12
000000002018-10-27-0000October 27

Sapporo
 Japan
Asia
—
W011XI
1972
000000002018-02-03-0000February 3
000000002018-02-13-0000February 13

Munich
 West Germany
Europe
S020XX
—
000000002018-08-26-0000August 26
000000002018-09-11-0000September 11

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe
—
W012XII
1976
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-15-0000February 15

Montreal
 Canada
North America
S021XXI
—
000000002018-07-17-0000July 17
000000002018-08-01-0000August 1

Lake Placid
 United States
North America
—
W013XIII
1980
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-24-0000February 24

Moscow
 Soviet Union
Europe[h]
S022XXII
—
000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-03-0000August 3

Sarajevo
 Yugoslavia
Europe
—
W014XIV
1984
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-19-0000February 19

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S023XXIII
—
000000002018-07-28-0000July 28
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12

Calgary
 Canada
North America
—
W015XV
1988
000000002018-02-13-0000February 13
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

Seoul
 South Korea
Asia
S024XXIV
—
000000002018-09-17-0000September 17
000000002018-10-02-0000October 2

Albertville
 France
Europe
—
W016XVI
1992
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8
000000002018-02-23-0000February 23

Barcelona
 Spain
Europe
S025XXV
—
000000002018-07-25-0000July 25
000000002018-08-09-0000August 9

Lillehammer
 Norway
Europe
—
W017XVII
1994
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-27-0000February 27

Atlanta
 United States
North America
S026XXVI
—
1996
000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-04-0000August 4

Nagano
 Japan
Asia
—
W018XVIII
1998
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-22-0000February 22

Sydney
 Australia
Oceania
S027XXVII
—
2000
000000002018-09-15-0000September 15
000000002018-10-01-0000October 1

Salt Lake City
 United States
North America
—
W019XIX
2002
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8
000000002018-02-24-0000February 24

Athens
 Greece
Europe
S028XXVIII
—
2004
000000002018-08-13-0000August 13
000000002018-08-29-0000August 29

Turin
 Italy
Europe
—
W020XX
2006
000000002018-02-10-0000February 10
000000002018-02-26-0000February 26

Beijing[i]
 China
Asia
S029XXIX
—
2008
000000002018-08-08-0000August 8
000000002018-08-24-0000August 24

Vancouver
 Canada
North America
—
W021XXI
2010
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S030XXX
—
2012
000000002018-07-27-0000July 27
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12

Sochi
 Russia
Europe[h]
—
W022XXII
2014
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-23-0000February 23

Rio de Janeiro
 Brazil
South America
S031XXXI
—
2016
000000002018-08-05-0000August 5
000000002018-08-21-0000August 21

Pyeongchang
 South Korea
Asia
—
W023XXIII
2018
000000002018-02-09-0000February 9
000000002018-02-25-0000February 25

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
S032XXXII
—
2020
000000002018-07-24-0000July 24
000000002018-08-09-0000August 9

Beijing
 China
Asia
—
W024XXIV
2022
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-20-0000February 20

Paris
 France
Europe
S033XXXIII
—
2024
000000002018-08-02-0000August 2
000000002018-08-18-0000August 18

TBD
TBD

—
W025XXV
2026
(TBD)

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S034XXXIV
—
2028
000000002018-07-21-0000July 21
000000002018-08-06-0000August 6

TBD
TBD

—
W026XXVI
2030
(TBD)

text: Host cities for multiple Summer and Winter Olympic Games[edit]

text:
List of cities that hosted multiple editions of the Olympic Games

City
Country
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
3 (1908, 1948, 2012)
0
3

Paris
 France
Europe
3 (1900, 1924, 2024)
0

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
3 (1932, 1984, 2028)
0

Athens
 Greece
Europe
2 (1896, 2004)
0
2

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
2 (1964, 2020)
0

Beijing
 China
Asia
1 (2008)
1 (2022)

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe
0
2 (1928, 1948)

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe
0
2 (1964, 1976)

Lake Placid
 United States
North America
0
2 (1932, 1980)

text: The 1906 Intercalated Games are not officially recognized by the IOC as an official Olympic Games.

text: Number of Olympic Games by country[edit]

text:
List of countries ranked by the number of times they hosted the Olympic Games

Rank
Country
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

1
 United States
North America
5 (1904, 1932, 1984, 1996, 2028)
4 (1932, 1960, 1980, 2002)
9

2
 France
Europe
3 (1900, 1924, 2024)
3 (1924, 1968, 1992)
6

3
 Japan
Asia
2 (1940, 1964, 2020)
2 (1940, 1972, 1998)
4

4
 United Kingdom
Europe
3 (1908, 1944, 1948, 2012)
0
3

5
 Canada
North America
1 (1976)
2 (1988, 2010)
3

6
 Italy
Europe
1 (1960)
2 (1944, 1956, 2006)
3

7
 German Empire/ Nazi Germany/ West Germany/ Germany
Europe
2 (1916, 1936, 1972)
1 (1936, 1940)
3

8
 China
Asia
1 (2008)
1 (2022)
2

9
 South Korea
Asia
1 (1988)
1 (2018)
2

10
 Soviet Union/ Russia
Europe
1 (1980)
1 (2014)
2

11
 Greece
Europe
2 (1896, 2004)
0
2

12
 Australia
Oceania
2 (1956, 2000)
0
2

13
 Norway
Europe
0
2 (1952, 1994)
2

14
 Austria
Europe
0
2 (1964, 1976)
2

15
  Switzerland
Europe
0
2 (1928, 1940, 1948)
2

16
 Brazil
South America
1 (2016)
0
1

17
 Spain
Europe
1 (1992)
0
1

18
 SFR Yugoslavia/ Bosnia and Herzegovina
Europe
0
1 (1984)
1

19
 Mexico
North America
1 (1968)
0
1

20
 Finland
Europe
1 (1940, 1952)
0
1

21
 Netherlands
Europe
1 (1928)
0
1

22
 Belgium
Europe
1 (1920)
0
1

23
 Sweden
Europe
1 (1912)
0
1

text: Number of Olympic Games by continent[edit]

text:
Rank
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

1
Europe
17 (1896, 1900, 1908, 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928, 1936, 1940
1944, 1948, 1952, 1960, 1972, 1980, 1992, 2004, 2012, 2024)
13 (1924, 1928, 1940, 1944, 1948, 1952, 1956
1964, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1992, 1994, 2006, 2014)
30

2
North America
7 (1904, 1932, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1996, 2028)
6 (1932, 1960, 1980, 1988, 2002, 2010)
13

3
Asia
4 (1940, 1964, 1988, 2008, 2020)
4 (1940, 1972, 1998, 2018, 2022)
8

4
Oceania
2 (1956, 2000)
0
2

5
South America
1 (2016)
0
1

6
Africa
0
0
0

text: Notes[edit]

text:
a Originally awarded to Chicago, but moved to St. Louis to coincide with the World's Fair.[14][15]
b The 1906 Games were sanctioned and treated as an Olympic Games when held, and they were recognized as an Olympic Games by the IOC until 1949[16]
c The 1908 Games were originally given to Rome, but were moved to London when Mount Vesuvius erupted.[17]
d The sailing events in 1920 were held in Ostend, Belgium and in Amsterdam, Netherlands.
e The 1940 winter games were originally awarded to Sapporo, but were moved to Garmisch-Partenkirchen before being cancelled.
f The 1940 summer games were originally awarded to Tokyo, but were moved to Helsinki before being cancelled.
g Equestrian events were held in Stockholm, Sweden. Stockholm had to bid for the equestrian competition separately; it received its own Olympic flame and had its own formal invitations and opening and closing ceremonies, just like the regular Summer Olympics.[18]
h Russia/Soviet Union spans the continents of Europe and Asia. However, the Russian National Olympic Committee is part of the European Olympic Committees. Also, Moscow is on the European side of the most commonly recognized boundary between Europe and Asia. (Sochi is in Asia per the usual geographic boundary, being just south of the Greater Caucasus' western end; but political approximations of the continental boundary place it in Europe.)
i Equestrian events were held in China's Hong Kong SAR.[19] Although Hong Kong's separate NOC conducted the equestrian competition, it was an integral part of the Beijing Games (unlike the 1956 Stockholm equestrian competition it was not conducted under a separate Hong Kong bid, separate flame, etc.).[20]


document_title: Card security code

question_text: where is the security code located on a debit card

text: Card security code

text: Description[edit]

text: The codes have different names:

text:
"CID": "Card Id", "Card Identification Number", or "Card Identification Code" – Discover, American Express (four digits on front of card)[a][4]
"CSC" or "Card Security Code" – debit cards,[which?] American Express (three digits on back of card)[4]
"CVC2" or "Card Validation Code" – MasterCard
"CVD" or "Card Verification Data" – Discover, sometimes used as the common acronym for this kind of code
"CVE" or "Elo Verification Code" – Elo in Brazil
"CVN2" or "Card Validation Number 2" – China UnionPay
"CVV2" or "Card Verification Value 2" – Visa

text: Types of codes[edit]

text: There are several types of security codes:

text:
The first code, called CVC1 or CVV1, is encoded on track two of the magnetic stripe of the card and used for card present transactions. The purpose of the code is to verify that a payment card is actually in the hand of the merchant. This code is automatically retrieved when the magnetic stripe of a card is swiped on a point-of-sale (card present) device and is verified by the issuer. A limitation is that if the entire card has been duplicated and the magnetic stripe copied, then the code is still valid. (See credit card fraud § skimming.)
The second code, and the most cited, is CVV2 or CVC2. This code is often sought by merchants for card not present transactions occurring by mail, fax, telephone or Internet. In some countries in Western Europe, card issuers require a merchant to obtain the code when the cardholder is not present in person.[citation needed]
Contactless cards and chip cards may supply their own electronically generated codes, such as iCVV or a dynamic CVV.

text: Location of code[edit]

text: The card security code is typically the last three or four digits printed, not embossed like the card number, on the signature strip on the back of the card. On American Express cards, the card security code is the four digits printed (not embossed) on the front towards the right. The card security code is not encoded on the magnetic stripe but is printed flat.

text:
American Express cards have a four-digit code printed on the front side of the card above the number.
Diners Club, Discover, JCB, MasterCard, and Visa credit and debit cards have a three-digit card security code. The code is the final group of numbers printed on the back signature panel of the card.
New North American MasterCard and Visa cards feature the code in a separate panel to the right of the signature strip.[5] This has been done to prevent overwriting of the numbers by signing the card.

text: Security benefits[edit]

text: As a security measure, merchants who require the CVV2 for "card not present" payment card transactions are required by the card issuer not to store the CVV2 once the individual transaction is authorized.[6] This way, if a database of transactions is compromised, the CVV2 is not included, and the stolen card numbers are less useful. Virtual terminals and payment gateways do not store the CVV2 code, therefore employees and customer service representatives with access to these web-based payment interfaces who otherwise have access to complete card numbers, expiration dates, and other information still lack the CVV2 code.

text: The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) also prohibits the storage of CSC (and other sensitive authorisation data) post transaction authorisation. This applies globally to anyone who stores, processes or transmits card holder data.[7] Since the CSC is not contained on the magnetic stripe of the card, it is not typically included in the transaction when the card is used face to face at a merchant. However, some merchants in North America, such as Sears and Staples, require the code. For American Express cards, this has been an invariable practice (for "card not present" transactions) in European Union (EU) countries like Ireland and the United Kingdom since the start of 2005. This provides a level of protection to the bank/cardholder, in that a fraudulent merchant or employee cannot simply capture the magnetic stripe details of a card and use them later for "card not present" purchases over the phone, mail order or Internet. To do this, a merchant or its employee would also have to note the CVV2 visually and record it, which is more likely to arouse the cardholder's suspicion.

text: Supplying the CSC code in a transaction is intended to verify that the customer has the card in their possession. Knowledge of the code proves that the customer has seen the card, or has seen a record made by somebody who saw the card.

text: Limitations[edit]

text:
The use of the CSC cannot protect against phishing scams, where the cardholder is tricked into entering the CSC among other card details via a fraudulent website. The growth in phishing has reduced the real-world effectiveness of the CSC as an anti-fraud device. There is now also a scam where a phisher has already obtained the card account number (perhaps by hacking a merchant database or from a poorly designed receipt) and gives this information to the victims (lulling them into a false sense of security) before asking for the CSC (which is all that the phisher needs).[8]
Since the CSC may not be stored by the merchant for any length of time[6] (after the original transaction in which the CSC was quoted and then authorized), a merchant who needs to regularly bill a card for a regular subscription would not be able to provide the code after the initial transaction. Payment gateways, however, have responded by adding "periodic bill" features as part of the authorization process.
Some card issuers do not use the CSC. However, transactions without CSC are possibly subjected to higher card processing cost to the merchants,[citation needed] and fraudulent transactions without CSC are more likely to be resolved in favour of the cardholder.[citation needed]
It is not mandatory for a merchant to require the security code for making a transaction, hence the card may still be prone to fraud even if only its number is known to phishers.
It is possible for a fraudster to guess the CSC by using a distributed attack.[9]

text: Generation of CSC[edit]

text: The CSC for each card (form 1 and 2) is generated by the card issuer when the card is issued. It is calculated by encrypting the bank card number and expiration date (two fields printed on the card) with encryption keys known only to the card issuer, and decimalising the result.[10][11]