• Increasing the annual percentage interest rate (APR) on the outstanding balance without the customer acting delinquently on the account in question.
  Example: John’s FICO credit score drops by 70 points over several months. Although he has never missed a payment on his credit card, the lender sees him as a default risk and raises his APR from 19% to 34%
• Using APR increases as penalties without a 45-day written notice
  Example: Suzy has missed several payments over the past year. On September 3, the bank decides to raise the APR on her card. The increase effects all purchases starting September 10. Suzy does not become aware of these changes until she receives her bill later in the month
• Double Cycle Billing – using the previous month’s balance to calculate interest due on an outstanding balance
  Example: Jim owes $1000, payable by September 30. He pays $550, ensuring he is not delinquent but leaving $450 due. Most lenders calculate interest due based on the average daily balance and interest for the billing cycle (e.g. $1000* 19.5% * 25 / 365 = $13.36 interest) , but lenders who use double cycle billing take the average of the current month’s balance and the previous month’s balance. Thus, if Jim spent $2000 the previous month, the interest would be calculated on $1500 rather than $1000 (interest = $20.03).

This consumer-friendly legislation subscribes to the widely-held belief that those who use credit should be absolutely protected against unscrupulous lenders and their willingness to prey on so-called high risk customers. These customers are often considered by lenders to be profitable due to their tendency to revolve (retain a partial balance after the payment due date and pay interest fees as a result). This practice of targeting economically vulnerable customers has been examined at length by several industry observers and authors …

>Continued at Cynics Unlimited

For example, in September of 1972 when I started teaching elementary school, I had a homeroom Grade 6 and taught visual art to Grades 6 to 8. My morning consisted of two main blocks of time. From 9am until 10:30 it was language arts (reading, writing and spelling) and from 10:45 until noon it was math. That was it. Then, in the afternoon, there was phys. ed/health, music or art (on alternating days) from 1 until 2:00 and social studies or science from 2:15 until 3:30pm.

In many ways it was like “the balanced school day” now with the large blocks of time — but with fewer subjects. Clearly the emphasis was on what many call “the basics” — reading, writing and arithmetic, social studies and science.

Then, along came (in no particular order) daily classes of “sustained silent reading (SSR),” phys ed, health and French. Then, we were asked to include dental education and sex education in health. Now, I understand there are also curriculum units on diversity and equity (including gender equality), family education and drug education.

Now, a key question could be: How did all that change come about? Well, in my opinion, most of these additions were not as a result of research and academic elites telling the education system what to include in the curriculum.

While it is true educational researchers (following on the heels of the Hall Dennis Report in the late 1960’s) were responsible for the start of social promotion, open concept schools and so-called “whole language,” it was parental pressures that made the biggest difference when it came to adding to the curriculum — making it very crowded indeed.

So, here we are now, some 36 years later, and when we look back we realize just how much the publicly funded ”system” has responded to public pressures. The problem is, however, that in responding to those demands, nothing was thrown out.  The day was not lengthened. The year was not lengthened and, in fact, has actually been shortened because of all the professional development days.

In other words, time on the “basics” have had to be continually reduced to make way for all these other demands.  Now what? There are only so many hours in a day and something has to give.

While many love to blame teachers and the teachers’ unions for all that is wrong with the education system — and they are responsible for the professional development days and I admit that not all teachers are created equal – there also needs to be some soul searching here as well by parents, past and present.

How many times have I heard comments like: “Why are they not learning that at school? I mean, how much time can it take in a week to teach _____?” Fine, but you can’t have it both ways. And, while it may not be politically correct to ask: What is left for children and youth to learn at home?

Moira MacDonald has an excellent column in today’s Toronto Sun on the complexity of the school system and how busy it is. Well, if parents want more of the “basics,” they are either going to have to take something away, lengthen the school day or lengthen the school year. Or, all of the above.

This issue is not just about teachers and teachers’ unions. It is also about parents and society’s expectations. 

Just a thought. But, maybe that is why independent schools do so well (or even the publicly funded Catholic system who also manage to include religious classes). They do not need to be all things to all people. So, when parents are able to choose where to send their children, they decide which school provides what they feel their children need — and usually the curriculum in private schools focuses on “the basics.”

Something to think about. 

C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

CBC leads the way for Toronto and Canada with a comprehensive selection of weekly, daily and even hourly news podcasts. Provincial, national and international programs are available for download as well as specialty programs like Quirks & Quarks and The Hour (the latter provided in video format) Music fans will be happy to hear that several Classical, Jazz and Pop music programs from Radio 2 and Radio 3 are also available for download, though some require a modest fee (most likely to keep CIRA quiet).

CanWest Global provides a worthy alternative to CBC for more conservative listeners. Its Global TV news station provides a daily video podcast of the 6:00 news. The catch is that the news segments are posted the morning after the TV broadcast, so avid watchers may not gain from this content. For editorial content, CanWest’s National Post newspaper offers two podcasts - Full Comment and Posted Toronto. Full comment topics are usually political and patterned around editorials on the Full Comment section of the NP website. Posted Toronto deals strictly with GTA matters and uses an informal talk radio format. Both NP podcasts are approximately weekly.

CityNews provides a daily web-only podcast with rotating news presenters. Unfortunately, the podcast is rarely longer than five minutes and contains no sports, weather or entertainment.

The Toronto Star provides several weekly special-interest podcasts. John Sakomoto’s Anti-Hit List takes on added relevance when one can actually hear the music being described, while Linwood Barclay manages to be more entertaining audibly than in print. YouDoc podcasts are less than two minutes long and offer quick health tips that straddle between info and advertisement. The auto racing podcast features decent speculation and debate but probably would have packed more punch in video format. Strangely, the Star doesn’t offer any news or editorial content, despite being Canada’s most prominent newspaper.

At the rear the pack, Sun Media appears to have no ITunes presence at all, while a search for the Globe and Mail revealed only one discontinued tech podcast. This is surprising considering the Globe was one of the first newspapers to allow user comments on its web content while the Toronto Sun’s columnists excel more than any other paper at covering local issues. Hopefully these two entities join the podcast party soon.

Unfortunately, most children and adults, no matter what type of educational program they are in, if they need accommodations they need to be formally assessed. And, being formally evaluated puts a label on that individual — often for life. Is that fair? Is that the only way we can get help for people? And, why does it matter? What those children and adults and their families are trying to avoid is the ”pygmalion principle” — how the expectations of others can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

That term comes out of a 1960’s study by Rosenthal and Jacobson that proved what you tell a teacher (or anyone else) is the kind of results you’ll get. For example, while the students were chosen randomly, some teachers were told their students were gifted (spurters) when in actual fact they were not. Yet, they excelled as though they were. Similarly, another teachers were told their students were slow developers. As expected, those students didn’t perform as well. In all cases, the labels (what teachers expected) resulted in a type of self-fulfilling prophecy.

In my opinion, we need to find a way to accept people exactly as they are, while simultaneously providing educational intervenion help where it is needed. It should not be essential to link that help with a diagnosis. Since resource help is available in all schools today and since most, if not all, colleges and univerities have special needs departments, why is it necessary to attach a negative “label” to someone — a label that could affect outcomes.

Not likely some might say. Well, I managed a private special education practice when I was teaching university and I saw far too many capable students with dyslexia be denied appying towards a Master’s degree because of the label – and the attitude “it will be too hard for you.”  

However, while it may be possible for some individuals and their families to resist the pygmalion principle (labels), someone with a severe disability like autism, may not be able to. In those cases, it simply does not make sense, nor is it humane, to deny their reality. However, it is equally true that we should be very careful about labels that tend to predetermine what a person can or cannot do.  And, when someone we know and love does have a diagnosed disability, whenever possible, we need to avoid placing either unrealistic or diminished expectations on them.

[...]  

C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

It was also explained to me that she, the mother, had asked her daughter’s high school teachers over the years about why her daughter wasn’t being taught distinct grammar and spelling.  In response she was always told they, high school teachers, didn’t have to do that. That whatever spelling and grammar she learned as a distinct subject would have been done, or at least should have been done, at the elementary level. Since that didn’t seem to have happened, the mother asked for my recommendations.

First of all, you can’t start from scratch. You can’t go back to the junior grades once your son or daughter is eighteen.  So, once your children graduate from high school with the required marks and credits to get accepted into a Canadian university, it is best to deal with where they are at right now.

As such, my first recommendation was that her daughter make sure she take part in her university’s orientation “essay” writing and related courses because some grammar and spelling would be included, if only in a contextual way.

Secondly, I recommended the family purchase a technological aid called the “Franklin Spelling Ace” (with prices ranging from $35.00 up to $150.00.), available at most tech stores such as Best Buy, Future Shop or the Source.  There are other brands but I have found they don’t work nearly as well as the Franklin.  The small phonetic spell checker is # SA-207A (half-way down the link’s page) and is also available on various Internet sites — just google “Franklin Spelling Ace.” (And, by the way, I unfortunately don’t have anything to do with Franklin Electronics.)

The Ace is completely phonetic and there is a more expensive version ($130.00 and up) that also has a “speaking” dictionary, so a student can make sure they have the right word, based on the meaning. The one I used when I taught university could be turned off when in the university library studying. 

The simple palm sized Ace works as follows: Let’s say you want to find the word “physician,” all you have to do is type in how it sounds, “fizishun,” and bingo you’ve got the right word.

Now, back to high schools not having to teach grammar and spelling. As it turns out, Ontario’s high school English teachers SHOULD be teaching courses about those topics. For example, I paid a visit to the Ontario Ministry of Education website — and I assume other provincial departments are similar — and what I found were several English curriculum documents that are applicable.

Here is the link. I won’t repeat what is there but I recommend parents who have high school aged children, read what is there or check out your own provincial or territorial department of education. Because if you are being told that high schools don’t or are not required to teach grammar, that information would be wrong.

Funny also that when I taught university undergraduate courses I had a complete class on grammar and spelling strategies when writing research and related reports and/or essays. And, I always included !0% for presentation as part of each written assignment’s grade. With grammar and spell checkers on every word processing program available, there simply should be no excuses!

In other words, if students don’t have the requisite writing skills, they need to learn them in whatever way they can and if that means taking non-credit short length courses or using tech aids, then they need to do what is necessary.

However, that said. To both elementary and high school teachers: There should be no such thing as “it should have been taught earlier.” Every individual matures at a different level. If high school and university kids need some guidance in this regard, it is our responsibility as educators to see that they learn the skills needed in our society to be able to read and write effectively.

Afterall, isn’t literacy (reading and writing and all that involves) and numeracy what school is all about or should be all about?

H/T to a regular reader. C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

Yesterday, for example, Ontario’s Education Minister Kathleen Wynn, had to take over the Toronto Catholic Board’s financial affairs by appointing school finance expert Norbert Hartmann, because she no longer had confidence in the ability of its trustees to do what needed to be done. (I wrote on this last month here.) 

No doubt many other Ontario boards have also been found to be negligent in their public responsibilities. And, just try to imagine how much all these trustees are costing — money that could be going to school resources — such as membership fees in their associations, their stipends, attendance at conferences and retreats and mileage.

Back in 1995, when I was working for an Ontario PC MPP, the Mike Harris government had to take away Board of Education taxing powers because of a similar “trustee” entitlement culture. At that time it was called the “Who Does What” process but, being on the inside, I can say that much of the downloading was done so as to take away the ability of boards to continually raise education property taxes.

In fact, because I was the MPP’s communications advisor, I can remember writing that the education tax increases over the Rae government period had been 160% and there was no end in sight. And, the reason is simple. Trustees are not able to make financial decisions because they are either related or married to union representatives or are on friendly terms with them. In small and rural communities, everyone knows everyone. And, in larger communities, they go away to conferences and retreats together. 

As a result, there simply is no arms-length relationship. So, when it comes to contract negotiations, the trustees simply give in to the demands placed upon them. In other words, they push paper and provide spin, but hard decisions are rarely made.

So, given that trustees no longer control local property taxes for the education portion, why do we need them? They cost a great deal of money and the public is obviously not getting any return for that money. An excellent model that we know already works is the New Brunswick model.

Based on school districts that basically would replace the school board infrastructure, the superintendent of education and the Minister of Education work together. But, as it states on Page 3 of the document, it is the Minister of Education who decides on education standards, as well as:

• maintains an environment that supports learning;
• provides money and other resources as required;
• provides an appropriate legislative and policy framework;
• identifies and reflects…the social and economic needs and desires of New Brunswickers;
• identifies and communicates provincial expectations;
• encourages and enables the work of dedicated education professionals.

In other words, everything that is done today by Ontario’s Boards of Education administration and staff would continue to be done. The only real change would be one less layer of bureaucracy and expense. Put another way, no board employees would lose their jobs. They would be able to work directly with the Ministry of Education and, I suspect, get a lot more done.

Since the McGuinty government already seems to be moving towards a provincial type of teacher union collective bargaining, completely centralizing that process would help as well since unions would not be able to deal with friends and relatives, but directly with the Minister and Ministry of Education staff.

So, Mr. McGuinty, you continually say you are the Education Premier. I  have also heard you say you can make tough decisions.  Well, it may not be politically popular among board trustees for you to fire them all, but my bet is most Ontarians would be cheering you and your minister every step of the way.

In other words, isn’t it long past time you were doing what is in the best interests of all Ontarians and our children and grandchildren – not just trustees who feel they are entitled to so much largess at public expense.

H/T Jack’s Newswatch and C/P. Also C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

For example, today’s Toronto Star editorial comment states:

“Bureaucrats at the Toronto public school board have barely begun the effort of launching an Africentric elementary school this coming fall. But now some trustees are calling for an Africentric high school to open just one year later.”

So, however well intentioned, some TDSB trustees are making recommendations for an Africentric high school without adequate “action research” and feedback on the pilot elementary program slated for Sheppard Public School in September of this year.  As such, in their unseemly haste, the needs of the students seem to have been forgotten or minimized.

Moreover, since the pilot project at Sheppard is to be a JK - Grade 5 “school within a school,” what has happened to the intermediate Grades 6 - 8?  Are students aged 11 to 13 supposed to be included with the high school aged youth? That would be a big mistake and a recipe for bullying.

Which begs the question: Why are some TDSB trustees now considering approving an Africentric high school to open only one year after the JK to Grade 5 pilot project begins when: (1) they don’t yet know the outcome of the pilot project; and (2) no one has mentioned what will happen to the students in the intermediate Grades 6 - 8?

While I am in favour of the notion of school choice – in terms of meeting the needs of students – I am not in favour of funding programs that have not been ascertained to be effective. As well, I am also not in favour of program decisions that are purely political.  The TDSB trustees and advisory board need to slow down, take a deep breath and find out what works and what doesn’t.

For example, if it turns out that students do not benefit from a segregated environment (which I clearly stated was my opinion when the decision was initially made), parents and trustees must have the freedom to state their case. We do not want it to become the equivalent of the global warming debate where some are called “deniers” simply because they disagree.

However, if the program is proven to be effective and students do benefit, TDSB trustees should then, and only then, proceed if that is what the parents want.

C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

The recipe has apparently been circulating on the interweb for some time:

Crack 2 eggs (large or extra-large) into the quart size Ziploc bag (not more than 2) and shake to combine them. Put in a variety of ingredients such as: cheeses, ham, onion, green pepper, tomato, hash browns, salsa, etc.

Make sure to get the air out of the bag and zip it up. Place the bag(s) into rolling, boiling water for exactly 13 minutes. You can usually cook 6-8 omelets in a large pot.

Open the bags and the omelet will roll out easily.

Because I’ve never successfully made an omelet–it turns into scrambled eggs every.single.time–I knew I had to try this. “But is it safe?” was my nagging, second thought. After googling around, I’m pretty sure the short answer is no, not really. That’s why you don’t do it every day. Just like you don’t microwave your leftovers in Tupperware and don’t drink from plastic water bottles every day…. right?

So anyway, I didn’t take pictures of the process, but I tried this with olives, tomatoes and mushrooms inside and came out with the fluffiest, most cohesive omelet I have ever made! tah-dah!

Only one minor mishap: the bottom of the baggie split open at the end of the cooking time, and the eggs got a little soggy. Maybe cuz I used generic Ziplocs? Some sites recommend the freezer baggies, but I don’t buy those in that size so, whatever. My toxic omelet had a deformed lump on the side because I cooked it with part of the baggie under the lid of the pot in an effort to keep it from touching the bottom. Next time I guess I’ll just put a metal strainer down.

Oh and that purple poo on the side? Potatoes. When I bought em I thought they just had purple skin but they were purple all the way through. Not sweet tho. Fried em up with some onions and rosemary, yes yes.

What an inspiring example of what can happen when everyone involved in a school makes a commitment to improve.  And, when they do, everyone benefits — clear across Canada because we are now telling their story. And that story is that school rankings, whether they be from the Fraser or C.D. Howe Institutes, can be used as the impetus for change. 

They are not, as I wrote yesterday, a “flawed picture” as suggested by the Ontario Public School Board Association (OPSBA). As Doretta Wilson, Executive Director of the Society for Quality Education pointed out today in an e-mail, there are jurisdictions in this country that are using the school rankings to make a difference and she included the link to the Vancouver Sun article as proof.  

And, make a difference they have. According to Janet Steffenhagen of the Vancouver Sun, Britannia is an inner city school. Half the children are ESL, more than half are aboriginal and the parents’ education is generally below average.  So, how did the staff take the school from a 2.8 ranking to a 7.5? One teacher was inspired to use a controversial “direct-instruction” literacy program called “Reading Mastery.” And, when students started making huge gains, the whole staff decided to use it school-wide spending up to 2 hours every single day on the program.

Memo to OPSBA and the Ontario teachers’ unions. Britannia Elementary School in Vancouver has used the school rankings to improve.  Don’t tell the government, the general public and parents, that it can’t be done. It not only can be done, it has been done.

[...] 

Note: Read Steffenhagen’s column in full. It is truly inspiring. And, let’s get the news out. Send the link to this post to everyone you know. C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.

While some individuals know exactly what they want to do with their lives, others may need to do an indepth old fashioned job search before they decide where to go to school and what to study.  Here are some ideas to think about.

• SEARCH! Go to every conceivable employment search site and look at what jobs are in demand. Even look in the local and national newspapers. Get a picture of what jobs and careers are growing and where in Canada that is happening. Make up a scrap book of the jobs according to their similar characteristics.

• DETERMINE! To the best of your ability, decide which jobs represent the new economy and those which will always be in demand — such as accounting. Separate out those that you think are highly competitive and likely not to remain in demand in the future.

• ABILITIES! Think carefully which of the demand areas suits your interests and abilities. There is nothing wrong with doing something you are interested in or even love to do. And, keep in mind that the career you are choosing now will not likely be for life. Most of us experience different jobs along the way or different types of jobs within a single company. And, you know what, at the end of your working journey, when you look back at what you have done, there will be a very interesting pattern. You will take something from every job you ever had. In other words, there is no such thing as wasting your time.

• DECIDE! When you have decided where there is a good fit, then go to the website for the college or university of your choice and find out who offers the training you will need to get into that type of job or career. If you want an apprenticeship, check the major union sites or do a google search until you find what you are looking for. Above all, don’t give up.

• VISUALIZE! Then, do it without second guessing what job you will get at the end. Just visualize that you will get what is right for you. Call it positive thinking or whatever, but as a cognition and memory specialist in my university career, I have to tell you, that a positive mindset means a lot when it comes to getting trained or retrained.

Whatever young people or those seeking a new job direction do, remember, staying in school longer pays off.  And, plan, plan, plan.

C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter. Revised May 2nd, 2008 at about 4pm.