It’s already the end of January, which means many companies are in the midst of (or are already done) preparing KPI and revenue projections for 2014. So in the spirit of “Data Season” I want to encourage all the marketing data analysts out there to take a deep dive into what really constitutes your KPIs – because not all data is created equal. Moreover, if you don’t do this, you run the risk of working less efficiently, and misappropriating your time, energy, and resources, in order to reach your department and company goals.

Let’s envision a scenario to illustrate this narrative.

The marketing departments at two companies, let’s call them Company A and Company B, have each been tasked with increasing new revenue by 25% YoY. That’s a pretty big jump. And the data analysts at Company A didn’t do thorough analysis of how the leads their marketing department generated translated into revenue that year. So the marketing department at Company A believes they must increase new leads, sales appointments, and revenue by 25%, without 25% more budget or resources than the year before. With little to no insight into the performance of the previous year’s marketing programs, their only recourse is to work 25% longer (or more!) in order to make up the difference.

Meanwhile, the team at Company B was busy dissecting how leads generated from various marketing channels impacted the sales funnel. What they discovered was that MQLs (Marketing Qualified Leads) from different lead sources did not represent a 1:1 value to bottom-line revenue. Let’s dive into why this is the case.

Conversion Rate. While leads from the first channel they analyzed converted at a rate of 4% from MQL to SQL (Sales Qualified Lead), leads from the second channel converted to SQL at 16%. We can consider leads from the second channel to be 4 times better quality than the first!

Deal Value. Not only were leads from the second channel moving through the beginning of the sales funnel much more efficiently, but the closed business from those leads was worth an average of 50% more per SQL as well.

Ultimately what this means is that comparing MQLs from each of the two channels 1:1 would be greatly undervaluing the second channel. In fact, in this case, an MQL from the second channel could be worth 6x that of the first in terms of revenue!

Armed with this information, the marketing team at Company B could allocate more resources to the most profitable channel in their marketing mix – enabling them to work smarter, not harder. I hope you take the same approach to understanding your metrics to get the most out of your marketing this year.

Before you choose an IRA real estate custodian, there are some things that you should consider. First of all, just because an IRA custodian allows real estate transactions does not mean that they “encourage” it.

I believe I can best explain what I mean with this example.

Suppose you decide to use the account to bid on one of the many foreclosures in your neighborhood. You are able to get the property and with minor repairs, it is ready to go back on the market, at a higher price, of course.

It takes six months to find a buyer, but the sell goes through and the deed is transferred to the new owner’s mortgage company.

There is an IRA real estate custodian that would charge you a total of $341 to complete this transaction.

So, because of the high fees associated with the transaction, it appears that the IRA custodian allows real estate, but doesn’t exactly encourage it. If you want to get the best deal, you need to shop around, just as you would for any other goods or services.

That same IRA custodian allows real estate, but also takes 45% of your earned interest on un-invested cash balances. When you invest in the real estate market, there are nearly always cash balances within the account and it isn’t fair or economically sound to earn less, as you decide what to do with that cash.

If the account owns rental property, there will always be cash coming in and it is wise to maintain a cash balance to pay for repairs, since any fee associated with the property must come from the account.

The best IRA real estate custodian is one that does not charge per-transaction fees or other charges that can really add up over a year’s time.

A reasonable annual fee that is usually based on the value of the account is the best choice.

If your current IRA custodian allows real estate transactions, you might just want to find out what charges your account will incur, since these fees are often hidden in the fine print. And, while you’re thinking about it, find out if they offer educational material or free seminars about investing.

Some custodians publish success stories about what other investors have accomplished and how they did it. There is at least one IRA real estate custodian that allows you to form a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) within the account, so that the account can hire a management team. That can really simplify the process.

There is one team that specializes in “neighborhood revitalization”.

As a result, they already have buyers lined up and properties available for purchase.

They just need investors that are interested in ‘doubling’ their typical rate of return, without making too much of an effort.

If an IRA custodian allows real estate transactions, they may be familiar with the whole process. If not, you might want to choose a different IRA real estate custodian. It pays to shop around.

Your next step is to seek an IRA custodian with real estate experience. Time is the issue as recent news articles reveal home sales are showing signs of improving.

Real estate will cycle as it always has. Now is the time to begin your profitable adventure.

The internet has somewhat opened up a can of worms when it comes to finding the best small business ideas.

See, on one side we have thousands of pages of information on just about any business idea you can think about. But on the other side, if you listen to these marketers and authors…just about every idea under the sun is fool-proof and becoming wealthy as a business owner is just about certain and failure impossible.

The thing is, there are too many folks out there on the internet selling hope when what you’re often getting is a bag of goods.

The hope that you can soon tell your boss to get lost.

Hope you can work in your pajamas and spend 90% of your time playing with your kids while the bucks pour in the door.

Hope you can buy that fancy car within a month or two.

The funny thing is…it takes more than a $47 ebook and a little will to be on your way to millions.

But the fact is, not every business idea is a good one for you personally just because someone shows you the checks they made online.

This “hard sell” of hope is nothing new. In fact, I remember back in my teens being sucked into a local ad where you could easily make thousands of dollars a week in your spare time.

Hey, sounds great to a 17 year old looking for some extra cash.

And sure enough, I go to a meeting where you sit through a dog and pony show and the presenter shows you his actual paychecks! Thousands of dollars a week for doing little work at all.

Today…this same “marketing and sales” process is plastered all over the internet. Big money. Easy work.

“If you have a heartbeat, you can earn millions with this simple, step by step system.”

It also raises a question to these so-called gurus…

“Why aren’t you doing it anymore if it’s so easy and lucrative?”

Because it’s a heck of a lot easier telling other people how to do it then actually doing it yourself.

Now, beyond the negativity, some business ideas are legitimate and might be a great fit for you. There is information out there that’s excellent, helpful, and educational. From seminars that run in the thousands to simple, $29 ebooks that give you just enough information to put you a step ahead of the competition.

But just be careful and make sure you understand what you’re getting and who it’s coming from. And beyond the information, be sure the business idea is the right fit for you, your personality, and your goals.

Introduction

Time was when Google developer conferences buzzed around Google Maps, Web tool kit and so on. But from the last conference onwards the limelight was on Android, and Chrome in that order. Perhaps the humongous opportunity resting in smartphones has sunk deep into Google. A fact acknowledged by Larry Page himself when he quipped that he would like to run the company via his smartphone.

Google has sought to integrate its other products with Android and update them in Android without having to update Android to match them in compatibility.

Updates

As mentioned in the previous paragraph, Android aficionados do see a silver lining out of the limited Android updates. Blogs are rife with how features introduced from this edition onwards don’t necessarily need an update in the OS. It provides fodder for agreement as the basic premise for changing an OS’ version is to enable it to play all the applications, be it ancient or futuristic. The various versions and configurations (of individual mobile hardware companies like Samsung, HTC, Sony etc) of Android were creating considerable firewalls to updating even the proprietary Google apps; apps that provide the quintessential Android experience. Google via its feature update, effectively tackles the problem of fragmentation as Google+, Gmail, Google Maps, Google Play, apps that are present in Android from versions Froyo onwards a well as Google Music All Access that are to be introduced now can all reside in versions Froyo onwards without need of an update. It seems the issue of fragmentation has been hopefully nailed.

Android Studio: this update does have the name android stamped on it! Meaning, it is Android specific. News is that Google plans to introduce Android Studio to replace the existing Eclipse developer environment for Android apps. Google collaborated with JetBrains to create the Android Studio. Of course this development has some loose ends to tie up, yet Google feels this IDE when launched would help Android developers increase their productivity. Here’s how it could help:

• It combines capabilities of Maven and Ant to build flexible and variedly flavored solutions.
• Excellent code editing capabilities including finding inline resources and Android specific customizations. It is boosted by advanced editor UI that enables drag-drop of widgets, simulate output view in different hardware configurations and even preview while editing in XML.
• Provides deep analytical capability to identify all sorts of bugs
• Provides wizards based on preset templates and also access to other Google services.
• Provides for easy migration of projects from Eclipse (as export) or import into Studio (of existing Eclipse IDE projects).

Google has, like Android OS, made Android Studio free and open source which could be the sweetener.

Google Play: Android developers can use the Google Play services to procure the desired APIs to construct maps, games or social media (read Google+) on Android devices (mobiles or tablets).

Gaming: entertainment is moving to handheld devices by droves putting a premium on providing the same user experience as in computer/gaming console. Google has stepped up the user experience by introducing the following features:

• Leaderboards: a maximum of 100 leaderboards, both public and social, is provided to enable developers engage users by letting them compare scores with other players. Leaderboards are created automatically for daily, weekly, monthly or customized versions.
• Rewards system: developers can reward users for engaging in the game by providing standard or incremental achievements that can be viewed in a user interface. The can use the developer consoles to control the achievements.
• Google provides the Cloud Saving APIs to save game status and settings on cloud.
• Developers can allow users to invite other players to the game or play with random users with the maximum limit pegged at 4.

Google facilitates the development of location aware apps by providing the following APIs:

Geofencing APIs: this API is used to define geographical boundaries. It also provides the following options:

• to create alert filters for customers exiting a particular area
• alter updates of location in response to locomotion habit(like walking, riding or driving)of the customer (see Activity recognition API)
• add or delete geographical boundaries

Fused location provider: this API uses underlying schema to provide the apt results to your query on locations, even complex level queries. It is quick, versatile and utilizes lesser battery power.

Activity recognition provider: this API uses power sensors to detect the customer’s current activity, for example, driving, walking, riding idling etc. This is used in tandem with the Geofencing API to provide the apt updates to the customer.

Single Sign-on via Google+: accounting for the fact that users change mobile devices often and that these devices may run different OS, Google provides the API to sign in via Google+ in any device. This obliterates the need to make services like Google Wallet, Games, Plus device specific. There are libraries for these services that respond to the auto sign request using their method.

Google Cloud Messaging: Google has made it possible to register apps using its Single Method. It also provides for messaging to 3rd party servers via its bi-directional messaging (XMPP) using Cloud Connection Server. Users can synchronize notifications across devices using Google’s APIs for user notification.

Google Play Developer Console: Google has been supporting its huge Android developer community and this year’s conference added the fillip to it.

App Translation Service: The localization support team from Google enables you to avail translation services for a nominal fee and post the strings to be translated in the language of your choice. If required it prompts the apt localization sting in the app graphics, APK or the About the product sections. This eventually helps developers reach out to a wider audience.

Analytics and Monetization: Keep a track on the performance of an app just become easier. Google Play and Google Analytics provide complementing services like app views and downloads and engagement metrics.

Google has introduced the order status API to let developers view the order status of an in-app from their servers. It has also decided not to charge test accounts for in-app test purchases.

Alpha and Beta testing and Staged Rollouts: Google has added the alpha-beta testing to let developers split their apps into two versions, alpha and beta, and get them tested by different user groups. If needed, testers for Google+ can also be added to test these versions.

Developers can henceforth roll-out updates only, to their apps to a batch of users to gauge their feedback. Developers can set the percentage of users who would be using the update.

Verdict

Perhaps for those expecting Android only chants at the Google I/O 2013, it might be a dampener. But for those familiar with the maverick that Google is will vouch the shrewd way it’s gone about indulging Android community. Updates to Google Play, its services, launch of the Android Studio, cloud messaging and ability to sign into Google services sans OS or hardware requirements are significant game changers. In short, it is about updating features sans the need to update OS.

Google’s I/O 2013 was an Android winner, in a hush hush way!

*Androider= a fan of Android who swears by it anytime, anywhere!

In theory everything is recyclable. I could recycle a building, an airplane, a DVD, a camera…or even my tooth brush. For something recyclable to actually be recycled someone needs to take that something and want to turn it into something new. That is exactly where the problem lies with the recycling concept.

In 1988-89 I was one of those university students espousing the need for recycling. However I imagined that the people who were making all the stuff that was filling up the landfills would buy back all the stuff they made and turn it back into new stuff. So when recycling started I thought for many years that was exactly what was happening. Then came the nice little triangle under all sorts of containers and I thought “Wow we were really successful! Power to the people.”

Then a few years ago, let’s say five, I realized that we were not as smart as we thought we were when everyone lobbied for recycling on behalf of our planet. We never insisted that the companies who make the stuff ending up in the landfills commit to taking back the waste they created. Instead what happened was it became societies waste to take care of. In some places the plastic industry makes a contribution to cover a small portion of the costs of running recycling depots, in other places, recycling depots receiving financing through levy systems. In large part, the recycling depots depend heavily on financing their operation through our taxes. In very few places do manufacturers who make plastic, glass, Styrofoam, buy back what they put out in the market. All the waste that comes from the profits their companies generate becomes society’s problem.

Recycling depots are like purgatory or if you prefer a Dr. Seuss reference: ‘the waiting room’.

We diligently pick out our approved ‘recyclables’ in our little communities to ensure we minimize what we send out to a landfill. We carefully put out the blue boxes (or other colours) with a feeling of content that we are joining others in doing our part to save the planet. A wonderful truck comes along and takes our stuff to the local recycling heaven where we believe angels are hard at work magically turning everything we sent in our blue boxes into something wonderful and new right in our communities. Maybe a fairy godmother helps out once in a while and waves a magical wand with a Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo and jovially exclaims: ‘Food container thou shalt become aluminum foil! Bottles thou shalt become carpets. “

(O.K. I know I am mixing up Cinderella, religion and Dr. Seuss. I aiming for mass appeal- kids, gen-x, elderly.)

Now I like most people have a decent brain. It is sometimes over-loaded but I like to think I am pretty smart. One day I woke up and realized “Hmm…I don’t think that the stuff in the blue box goes to recycling heaven in my own community.” It was like waking up and doubting the existence of God. The mere thought that the stuff I carefully put in my blue box was not re-appearing on the grocery shelves in my neighbourhood grocery store with the fancy triangles, was earth shattering.

With a bit of research I soon discovered: something is only recycled if someone somewhere in the world is willing to buy that product, and tons of it, from recycling depots and then turn it into something else. The next sad truth: that ‘someone’, when they found them, was rarely found in the same community as where the recycling took place. Sometimes they were not even in the same country!

So…..

You need to be a savvy shopper when a manufacturer claims you should buy their product because it is ‘recyclable’ or made from ‘recycled materials’. Before you buy it give the manufacturer a call and ask where it is recycled; how much of that exact same product they buy back and if they don’t then who and where is buying it back to turn into something; and lastly how much recycled content is in their product. Many products with ‘recycled content’ have less than 20% that is recycled materials. Their product continues to depend heavily on the continued extraction of petroleum to obtain virgin supplies to make the plastic.

Recycling is a great solution. I was all behind it. In theory it can minimize what we send to a landfill. However after twenty years of practice doing the recycling thing, it is about time we re-evaluate just how successful the plastic industry has been at reducing their waste in relation to the profits they have made at the expense of our planet. The plastic and polystyrene industry has more than fifty years of profiting on this planet and close to twenty of those to clean up its mess through recycling efforts supported in many communities through public taxes.

Now plastics are being made and exported in communities around the world where there is no luxury of a tax base to buffer the expense of a recycling depot. It is no longer acceptable to say that littering is the problem. The problem is in what we make, how we make it, what it is made from and what we can do locally when we are done with our stuff. This emperor needs some new clothes.

The old saying that ‘Knowledge equals power’ is simply not true. The correct saying should be

‘Knowledge that is ACTED upon equals power’

The difference in these two statements is massive. No matter how much knowledge you have on a certain subject it doesn’t equate to anything unless you use this knowledge to take the relevant action.

If you have an amazing knowledge of Investment Strategies but you forget to actually implement this knowledge then you aren’t going to receive the true benefits or power that deserve to be associated with this knowledge. Now this may sound very simplistic and basic but you would be amazed at how many people have great knowledge that they never put into action.

Human beings have a terrible habit of underestimating their ability and knowledge. We also have a bad habit of wanting to know everything about a subject before we actually put it to use. I can tell you now that if you keep waiting until you know everything then you will never actually start.

READY FIRE AIM

This is one of my favorite sayings. Too many people spend too much time Aiming and forget to actually Fire. The best way to get things happening is to fire and then start worrying about the aim.

So am I suggesting that you start gambling with your money on the Stock Market with Strategies that you don’t properly understand? Of course not but I am suggesting that your start Trading on the Stock Market with Fake money. Paper trading is one of the best ways to learn as a Stock Market Investor. So once you learn a new Stock Market Investment Strategy you should start to paper trade and see how you go. If your aim is a bit off then readjust some things and try again. My main point is DON’T wait until you know everything before you start implementing your knowledge.

‘Knowledge is too precious to not use it’

Does Ready Fire Aim mean that you shouldn’t do loads of research and preparation? Not at all. You should be very thorough in your preparation but not so thorough that you never get to put this knowledge into action. It is a common misconception that once in a lifetime opportunities only come around ‘once in a life time’. The reality is that we can create our own once in a life time opportunities every single day. We simply need to implement our knowledge by taking proactive action.

This article is an introduction to the world of LED Lighting and Controls. I will follow-up with more articles specific to various lighting and control issues that you may have in your environment. The technology discussed is truly leading to a sustainable lighting environment guiding away from the consumption model.

In 2007 anyone who could put a white LED onto a Printed Circuit Board tried to sell a light bulb replacement. Having been involved with laser diode design and in specific blue lasers in their early stages I had a high curiosity whether those devices could replace the light bulb or fluorescent tube.

Like others we attempted to make a light bulb replacement only to find out that the cost of the technology is still very high and in order to justify that cost the device would have to be more efficient than a fluorescent tube and keep its light output for a very long time to get a return of investment.

Deeply understanding the quantum physics involved I knew that the junction where the light is created, that is deep in the solid state structure, had to be kept rather cool to not get damaged over time by heat and to perform with high-efficiency.

When we saw all players not to care about efficiency or keeping their devices cool but try to develop a light bulb with a slightly longer life but not too much longer, the opportunity arose to make a very long-lasting light fixture. We are talking 10 years plus without light degradation or change in color.

Fortunately we also came from the networking arena so we developed a protocol of communication between the light fixtures that allows uniform dimming over an infinite number of devices by one low-cost dimming device.

Imagine that in future a supermarket does not have to change its’ light fixtures every 3 years but can leave them in place for 15 years or more, no more light bulbs or tubes to be replaced and have no light loss.

Oh by the way, LEDs do not have Mercury like fluorescent tubes and “Energy Saving” lamps. The wattage on the fixture is the actual wattage consumed unlike your “Energy Saver” bulb that consumes between 30% and 50% more energy than advertised.

To further cement commitment to the environment manufacturers should recycle all their product as long as the user finds a way to get it to a recycling center and guarantee to pay back to the customer a recycling value on return.

However, it is difficult for the non-specialist person to understand that not all LED devices are created equal and to recognize what is marketing hype and what is real. The DOE or Energy Star are not helping as they lag years behind technology and generally support the consumption model brands rather than lasting and really efficient technology to the point of being hostile to new and better technologies.

This paper argues that for most of the 20th century, schools have constructed multiple categories of “unlikeness” or unlike ability, and that these categories were created or soon appropriated to mean “children who cannot learn together.” Important evidence collected throughout the century, but most especially in the past twenty years, reveals that school categories favoring children’s likeness, rather than their “unlikeness” promise to improve educational fairness and the country’s educational quality. Ability grouping has been bolstered by the argument that equal opportunity in a democracy requires schools to provide each student access to the kind of knowledge and skills that best suit his or her abilities and likely adult lives. To make the argument more palatable in a culture that, rhetorically at least, values classless and colorblind policies, educators and policymakers have reified categorical differences among people. So, in contemporary schools, there are “gifted” students, “average” students, “Title I” students, “learning disabled” students, and so on, in order to justify the different access and opportunities students receive. Assessment and evaluation technology permits schools to categorize, compare, rank, and assign value to students’ abilities and achievements in relationship to one another (as well as to students in other schools, states, and countries-past and present). Homogeneous grouping began in earnest early in the 20th century. It matched the prevailing IQ conception of intelligence, behavioral theories of learning, a transmission and training model of teaching, and the factory model of school organization. It fit with schools’ role in maintaining a social and economic order in which those with power and privilege routinely pass on their advantages to their children. Homogeneous grouping embodied a belief that permeated schooling during the 20th century-that we understand most about students when we look at their differences, and the more differences that can be identified, the better our understanding and teaching. Homogeneous grouping provided policymakers and educators a way to “solve” an array of problems attributed to the growing diversity of students. New immigrants needed to learn English and American ways. Factories needed trained workers. Urban youth needed supervision. And schools needed to continue their traditional role of providing high-status knowledge to prepare some students for the professions. Policymakers defined equal educational opportunity as giving all students the chance to prepare for largely predetermined and certainly different adult lives. Concurrently, two phenomena shaped a uniquely American definition of democratic schooling: (1) universal schooling would give all students some access to knowledge; (2) IQ could justify differentiated access to knowledge as a hallmark of democratic fairness. While most current grouping practices don’t rely on IQ-at least exclusively-the early dependence upon it set a pattern that continues today. Standardized achievement tests, strikingly similar to IQ tests, play an important role in dividing students into ability groups and qualifying students for compensatory education programs; standardized language proficiency tests determine which class “level” is appropriate for limited English students. In conjunction with other measures, IQ remains central in the identification of gifted and cognitively disabled students.

Over the course of the 20th century, compulsory education laws and the necessity of a highschool diploma drew more and more students to school-even those previously considered uneducable. States and local school systems developed an array of special programs for students who, in earlier times, simply would not have been in school. By the 1960s, the federal government had turned to special categorical programs as its principal way to guarantee education for all American students. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) provided categorical funding for “educationally deprived” students. Lau et. al. v. Nichols et. al. was brought on behalf of Chinese students in San Francisco and led to legislation requiring that all schools provide special assistance to their students whose native language is not English. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provided funds to classify students with physical and neurological problems and provide these students with special education programs when it was believed that they could not be accommodated in regular programs. Advocates for “gifted” students increasingly used the “bell curve” logic to argue that the gifted and the cognitively disabled are like a pair of bookends, and that those at the high end of the curve also required special support because they are as different from “normal” students as the disabled. Educators responded in culturally predictable ways. They identified students who were “different,” diagnosed their differences as scientifically as possible, and assigned them to a category. They then grouped students for instruction with others in the same category and tailored curriculum and teaching to what each group “needs” and what the culture expects. So, today, educators routinely assign “normal” students to “regular” classes at different levels (e.g., high, average, slow). They place the others in “special” programs for learning disabled, behavioral problems, gifted, limited English, poverty-related academic deficiencies, and more. Within homogenous groups, teachers assume students can move lock step through lessons and that all class members will profit from the same instruction on the same content at the same pace. Lurking just beneath the surface of these highly rationalized practices, however, are the illusion of homogeneity, the social construction of classifications, the prevailing biases of race and social class, and self-fulfilling prophesies of opportunities and outcomes.

The considerable student differences within supposedly homogenous classes are obvious and well documented. And yet, for most people, the characteristics and categories by which students are sorted remain more salient than the “exceptions” that impugn those categories. Many educational constructs, including those used to classify students, began as narrowly defined, highly specialized, technical terms or measures. However, as they make their way from research to professional journals and teacher preparation programs to popular media to the everyday talk of policymakers and the public, they loose their narrow definitions and specialized uses. What may have begun as specific technical concepts or as informal notions such as “at risk,” “gifted,” “high ability,” “college prep,” “attention deficit,” “hyperactive,” “handicapped,” etc. are quickly reified and become a deeply embedded feature of students’ identities in their own and others’ minds. African American, Latino, and low-income students are consistently overrepresented in low-ability, remedial, and special education classes and programs. This is not surprising, given that grouping practices grew from the once accepted practice of preparing students of different racial, ethnic and social-class backgrounds for their separate (and unequal) places in society. In part, placement patterns reflect differences in minority and white students’ learning opportunities that affect their preparation and achievements. But they also reflect the fact that US schools use white, largely middle-class standards of culture and language styles to screen for academic ability and talent. Teachers and school psychologists sometimes mistake the language and dialect differences of Hispanic and Black students for poor language skills, conceptual misunderstandings, or even poor attitudes. An additional hazard for students of color is that schools often confuse cultural differences with cognitive disabilities, particularly retardation. Researchers have noted for the past 25 years that students with identical IQs but different race and social class have been classified and treated very differently in special education placements. The misidentification problem triggered both federal and state court decisions requiring that potentially disabled students receive due process. In a far reaching decision, the California courts ruled in Larry P. v. Wilson Riles (1979) that schools could no longer use intelligence tests to identify minority students as mentally retarded. However, substantial problems remain and new ones emerge, including recent evidence that African American boys are disproportionately identified as having Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Placement in a low class becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of low expectations, fewer opportunities, and poor academic performance. Poor performance begins the cycle anew, giving additional justification to schools to reduce expectations and opportunities. Extensive research makes clear that, in every aspect of what makes for a quality education, kids in lower tracks typically get less than those in higher tracks and gifted programs. Finally, grouping practices help shape students’ identities, status, and expectations for themselves. Both students and adults mistake labels such as “gifted,” “honor student,” “average,” “remedial,” “learning disabled,” and “mild mental retardation” for certification of overall ability or worth. Everyone without the “gifted” label has the de facto label of “not gifted.” The resource classroom is a low-status place and students who go there are low status students. The result of all this is that most students have needlessly low self-concepts and schools have low expectations. These recommendations reflect growing support for heterogeneous grouping as necessary to ensure that all students have access to high-quality curriculum, teachers, and learning experiences. For example, early analyses of the disappointing performance of U.S. students on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) support mounting concerns that the low scores stem, in part, from the tracking of most American students in less academically demanding math and science classes. Increasingly, educators and policymakers are developing an awareness that schools cannot teach or achieve social justice unless they eliminate grouping practices. A number of school desegregation cases have cited the practice as a source of continuing racial discrimination. However, this goal will not be accomplished quickly, and policy reports will simply gather dust unless enlightened educators understand and act to change the norms and political relations these grouping practices embody. There is a long, hard road ahead.

If you are unaware of the real estate terminologies then you might be wondering what overcapitalisation is. Basically, overcapitalisation refers to an overspend on construction or renovation costs which means the actual cost of a construction/renovation of the property is superior to its real market value. Overcapitalisation is also considered as asset inflation. Confused? Let’s make it simple. For instance, Mr A is planning to renovate his house by remodeling the bathrooms, basement and kitchen; upgrading the living room and bedrooms; adding a porch and swimming pool; installing vinyl siding, fencing front entrance and extending the garden. Mr A decides to use upper end expensive quality materials in the renovation. While doing so, he forgot to consider the real market value and quality of the houses in this area, which was lower than the value of his upgraded house. This is overcapitalisation.

Now the next question is what should be done to avoid overcapitalisation? Simple! When renovators and home builders are planning for home improvements, they must keep in mind some factors which have greater impact on the overall value of the property. For instance, evaluating neighbour’s housing style, demographics of neighbourhood, streetscape, design trends of neighbouring property, and recent resale prices of the homes in the area.

Although generally improvements and renovations add value to a property, it will be wrong to say they will ALWAYS increase its value. The reason is that if renovations and improvements are overdone, without keeping in view the real value of the area where your property is located, you might be overcapitalising your property. This means that your property cost will not equal its market value.

Hence, it is rational that a renovator or home builder is aware of overcapitalisation, and increases the value of the property only to an extent that it can cope up with. Remember, you’ve got to be really careful about overcapitalisation when upgrading or renovating your property.

Often overcapilisation occurs when people are not rational and business minded in their approach. Typically home owners will spend more on fixtures and fittings with the aim to live in the property.

Some cultures often prefer to live in larger homes as status symbols and will opt to spend more on improvements than is the norm in the locaility.

However if you are an investor or builder, it is important to get the mix right as this will result in higher profit margins. Getting it wrong can often mean longer selling periods and discounted prices. Do your due diligence to avoid disappointment.

Table tennis is a sport enjoyed by millions of people around the world. It is an inclusive sport that can be played by people of all ages and abilities. If a player can serve and return a ball, they can play. This is one sport that does not exclude people because of a physical disability. Nor does it require significant modifications to remain open to everyone.

Table tennis has been part of the Paralympic Games since 1960. The program consists of five wheelchair divisions and five standing disabled divisions. Athletes can qualify for the Paralympics in one of three ways. They can win the IPTTC Regional Qualifications in their singles class, be one of the top internationally ranked players in their class, or they can be selected as a wildcard player.

The International Table Tennis Committee for the disabled (ITTC) began in 1976, at a time when there were no other sports organizations that catered to people with disabilities. The Committee changed its name in 2003 to the International Paralympic Table Tennis Committee (IPTTC). In 1997 the IPTTC created a website to display and maintain rankings, rules, and other general information. They were once again leading the way with their thinking as this website was the first of its kind amongst disabled sports organizations. The IPTTC continues to do a great job of getting pertinent information to people who are interested in the sport. To date, athletes from more than 100 countries have participated in IPTTC sanctioned international tournaments.

It takes practice and patience to be a world-class athlete, whether the athlete is physically disabled or not. Athletes with physical disabilities are not limited to only competing against other disabled players. Table tennis is an equalizing sport. Able-bodied and physically disabled people can compete against one another. Many competitive paralympic players began playing the sport against able-bodied friends and family members. While it can be difficult for players in wheelchairs to maneuver their chairs to play a shot, these players learn to adapt, frequently learning to effectively play a more defensive game.

Wheelchair athletes often use chairs that are specially designed to provide stability and sufficient height for the player. Regulations state that players may use cushions for height purposes, but cushions can create poor balance and affect the athletes’ level of play. Standing athletes use lightweight prostheses and orthodontics that are well suited for lateral movements. Athletes who are not able to grip a racket due to their disability use specially crafted instruments that attach the racket to the hand. Some athletes choose to simply use a bandage to affix their racket to their hand. These modifications do not give them an advantage over another player, but rather they even the playing field so that players can compete regardless of their disability.

This sport can be mentally and physically challenging, but with that challenge comes a sense of satisfaction when a player experiences success. Players who are dedicated and practice will not only build the skills necessary to be a competitive athlete, they will also gain the confidence that comes with working towards and achieving a goal.