|
UnFriendly Fire posted:I've never actually worked a job where I didn't get 2 weeks withheld. This includes jobs for local school boards, crown corporations and the provincial government. Until currently working in government I actually hadn't either, plus those earnings are a legal trust and a directors liability in the case of private business so they are legally protected, even through bankruptcy which is nice and allays the concern of a poster earlier who feared bankruptcy affecting the distribution of funds.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 15:10 |
|
|
Team THEOLOGY posted:Until currently working in government I actually hadn't either, plus those earnings are a legal trust and a directors liability in the case of private business so they are legally protected, even through bankruptcy which is nice and allays the concern of a poster earlier who feared bankruptcy affecting the distribution of funds. Employees get their back pay before creditors, they don't get the money if there is no money (though the WEPP will kick in a couple thousand) and keep in mind companies only go bankrupt when they're already in the red.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Employees get their back pay before creditors, they don't get the money if there is no money (though the WEPP will kick in a couple thousand) and keep in mind companies only go bankrupt when they're already in the red. Nah man, that's not legally how it plays out. Because it is a directors liability not just the company but the people themselves are legally liable - beyond creditors and the like. Think of that trust in the same way as child support. Even if you go bankrupt you are still legally required to pay that money back, even if you end up working at McDonald's they will claw it away from the Director through insured earnings and specifically designed safeguards. Obviously it's not ideal and you are right, but if what you say happens chances are payroll isn't going out in the last week either way. This creates that buffer. Edit: change - director through business insurance and legal required safeguards. Team THEOLOGY fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
Team THEOLOGY posted:Nah man, that's not legally how it plays out. Because it is a directors liability not just the company but the people themselves are legally liable - beyond creditors and the like. Think of that trust in the same way as child support. Even if you go bankrupt you are still legally required to pay that money back, even if you end up working at McDonald's they will claw it away from the Director. Obviously it's not ideal and you are right, but if what you say happens chances are payroll isn't going out in the last week either way. This creates that buffer. No Director is working at McDonald's getting his wages garnished to pay old employees, he'd just declare personal bankruptcy. Also in practice it's very difficult for employees to sue for their back wages (hence why the WEPP exists) they're only entitled to the last six months of wages and they have to sue within six months of when payment was expected and name the correct director (the one who would have been Director at the time services were rendered not necessarily the Director at the time of bankruptcy). This is quite deliberately structured to make it almost impossible to collect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:No Director is working at McDonald's getting his wages garnished to pay old employees, he'd just declare personal bankruptcy. Also in practice it's very difficult for employees to sue for their back wages (hence why the WEPP exists) they're only entitled to the last six months of wages and they have to sue within six months of when payment was expected and name the correct director (the one who would have been Director at the time services were rendered not necessarily the Director at the time of bankruptcy). This is quite deliberately structured to make it almost impossible to collect. You realize that when I say it is all insured I mean, corporations are required to insure it through Directors liability insurance which is usually linked to a corporate indemnity policy. Regardless of where he ends up working, they get paid. Not even personal bankruptcy would protect you from this trust covenant. All that to say, it's not nearly impossible to collect because of a variety of legal precedents. It really isn't that difficult. In Canada it is a cut and dry legal case which almost anyone fresh out of law school could work through if they specialized in taxation/business interruption etc. Edit: But don't get me started on the US of A. Where this conversation would be completely different. Team THEOLOGY fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Sorry, but I just caught up on the two weeks pay thing. I had to read that article several times. It is extremely poorly written, and comes with a significant bias, making it sound like this is some heinous act. I really don't think what they've depicted is what is actually being enacted. Full disclosure: I'm in absolutely no position to know. Every company I have ever worked for (and I've worked for a few) operates on the same basic method. You work for a period of time, then you submit a timesheet saying what you did. That gets sent to the accounting department who sort out all the extra stuff, such as EI contributions, CPP contributions, taxes, extra expenses, and so on. Then after another period of time, the article states the industry standard is two weeks, they issue a payment. If you are a private contractor who works for large companies that have an accounts payable department, I've heard of this delay period being as much as three months. Apparently, the government pays their employees for the same day as the cheque is issued. I can't see anybody in their right mind ever doing this because, as the article states, there is no way to take into account different payment situations. What if you need to work an extra hour of overtime on payday? "Oh well, too bad you've already been paid for today." It just doesn't make any sense. quote:...to replace its archaic, 40-year-old pay system with a new off-the-shelf system by 2015-16. The move is part of the government’s plan to upgrade its aging IT system and is supposed to transform and streamline how cheques are processed and people are paid. So the Government wants to update their payroll software so they can finally catch up with the twentieth century. I would be entirely unsurprised to learn that any payroll software package that you can purchase doesn't have the capability to issue payroll for work that hasn't happened yet. I have tried to pry some more concrete information out of Google, but I haven't found anything solid one way or the other. But in order to implement such a thing they need a transition plan. There are only two options. Option one, you can do a hard transition. In such a case you pay your staff on a payday, then switch the entire thing over to the new system. As such, the next paycheque wouldn't be received for a month. Two weeks after payday staff submit their time, then two weeks after that they get paid for it. The alternative the government is choosing is to pay out an extra two week paycheque by treating that final payday as also being the day the employees submitted their time, and then paying them again for that time two weeks later. Then they want to recoup that extra payout by reducing the paycheques of everybody for one year. Effectively, they will get paid twice for the same period of work. The problem that everybody is in a huff about is that it doesn't feel like they're being paid extra. They'll just get another paycheque two weeks after their last paycheque, and it will in fact be a lower dollar amount then what they were being paid before. Unfortunately, I don't think there is any way around that. If, as somebody suggested, this system were to be implemented only for new hires and current employees didn't need to be affected there would be either some 300,000 employees payroll that the government just ate, or there would need to be two parallel accounting systems with new hires working one way and current employees working another. Neither one of those sounds like a very good idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
I actually worked for a company a few years ago that made a similar transition to the held-back two week pay period, and they actually offered a special 'loan' to their employees to make up for the missing two weeks pay, to be re-paid by tiny amounts on subsequent cheques, to smooth the transition for those who were living paycheque to paycheque. I don't suppose the government would be making a similar offering? It basically made the whole process painless for everybody, both employees and employers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
LingeringDoubt posted:
We've been over that the plural of anecdote is not data. The issue here is the government / that article claims it to be industry standard without any evidence. The whole time sheet aspect is only relevant to those paid hourly - salaried workers typically will have identical paychecks regardless of hours worked (obviously with some variations for say unpaid days off, etc.). As for the overtime/hours worked thing, I know at some places I've worked it's completely automatic - the payroll software will automatically adjust for the hours worked, and pay that person for said hours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:Until, of course, the housing market collapses (poors shouldn't have bought houses!) or the student loan debt is for a degree with poor job prospects (should have gotten a STEM degree/poors don't need education!) Well, I'm glad that we can both agree that poor people should not attempt to own homes if it means over leveraging themselves. Unless you're trying to imply that they should be subsidized? A student loan is considered a good personal investment in yourself either to learn a new skill for employment opportunity or gaining a liberal art degree for soul searching purposes. If the latter lands you in a fruitful employment in the field, then that's great! Good for you! Line of credit can be obtained at a bank with a reasonable interest for the sake of emergency. I mean, you can't really pay rent with a credit card, can you? And if you could, wouldn't you prefer a rate of 5% instead of ~20%? I'm not sure what you're having trouble understanding. As for never had to drive to work, that's not true. I used to work 3 jobs while going to school fulltime and this needed a vehicle in a bad way. I paid $600~ for a beater just to get to and forth covering great distance so I could earn money. I don't understand what your issue is. I have been in a financial crunch before but made serious sacrifice to bounce back and made some serious cash working just barely over minimum wages while going to school fulltime. I guess some people just can't handle the idea of making sacrifices. But no, go on about how I'm a privileged piece of poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Haha, is that a joke post QB?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Canadian Politics Megathread: gently caress the poors, it's all their own fault - QuaintBucket
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:
You seemed to handle that very well all on your own, no need to ask anyone for help showing off how sad a human being you are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:As for never had to drive to work, that's not true. I used to work 3 jobs while going to school fulltime and this needed a vehicle in a bad way. I paid $600~ for a beater just to get to and forth covering great distance so I could earn money. I don't understand what your issue is. I have been in a financial crunch before but made serious sacrifice to bounce back and made some serious cash working just barely over minimum wages while going to school fulltime. I've been attending bimonthly community meetings in the Jane-Finch neighbourhood recently and even as a bleeding heart Canadian leftist I have been pretty shocked by the degree of privation and desperation that people regularly experience in this community. I'm not trying to judge you or pretend that I know what your life circumstances are but I can definitely tell you that having $600 in cash that you can spend on a car, or being in a position where you can afford to go to school (even if you get there with loans and part time jobs) does indeed put you in a position of privilege that is far beyond the reach of hundreds of thousands of Canadians. You obviously had opportunities that a lot of other people didn't have. You're not obligated to feel guilty just because you've been given the opportunity to better yourself, but you do need to recognize that you exercised options that many people in Canada never could have. quote:I guess some people just can't handle the idea of making sacrifices. This is offensively stupid. I don't know if you're a privileged piece of poo poo or not but if you think that everyone has the same options that you had then you're delusional. Would it really have been that hard for you to discuss your personal experiences here without having to directly imply that poor people are all the authors of their own misery?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:Well, I'm glad that we can both agree that poor people should not attempt to own homes if it means over leveraging themselves. Unless you're trying to imply that they should be subsidized? Well, considering that we incentivised home-ownership through the tax system as a way of buttressing economic growth in the recession (First-Time Home Buyers' Tax Credit), it's really not as simple as talking about personal responsibility, especially considering that high housing prices directly effect the price of rentals. And actually you should be concerned that we are heading for a real-estate bubble. Amazingly, macroeconomic effects have the potential to ruin you personally, or many other people, all of who were as financially responsible as you were! quaint bucket posted:As for never had to drive to work, that's not true. I used to work 3 jobs while going to school fulltime and this needed a vehicle in a bad way. I paid $600~ for a beater just to get to and forth covering great distance so I could earn money. I don't understand what your issue is. I have been in a financial crunch before but made serious sacrifice to bounce back and made some serious cash working just barely over minimum wages while going to school fulltime. I guess some people just can't handle the idea of making sacrifices. Good for you. But you know what, your personal experience has nothing to do with larger patterns, such as the fact that household debt in Canada is continuing to climb, and that many Canadian families are living paycheck to paycheck. Putting aside the matter of your personal privilege, the effect of a depression in consumer spending, given the fact that private industry is hoarding cash and government is cutting back, would be to drop us into a recession. Personal sacrifices is stupid straw man that idiots who don't understand the economy use when they're challenged on their bullshit. Taking on debt was also incentivised by the government during the recession, exactly as a way of fending of economic collapse due to our economy's reliance on the US. We are not in a good position economically as a country, and morality tales about what people should do doesn't solve that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Isn't QB the same goon that was working in the payday loan racket and was complaining about PS workers being able to bank their sick days? I think if everyone was smart and responsible then you'd be out of a job, bub Also expecting everyone to be able to work multiple jobs while attending full-time school just because you managed to survive it is pretty daft. Not everyone is capable of such levels of self-abuse, nor should they be required to. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
People with multiple jobs make me sad. I can't even get one. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
One of the innumerable charms of modern society is that we're collectively feeling both overworked and desperate for jobs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:People with multiple jobs make me sad. I can't even get one. I'm thinking of starting to apply for jobs in rural Manitoba and Saskatchewan, just to see how it feels to turn down a job.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 22:25
|
|
|
My last post was done partly in jest to poke some of you guys a little bit so there was some exaggeration.Cordyceps Headache posted:Well, considering that we incentivised home-ownership through the tax system as a way of buttressing economic growth in the recession (First-Time Home Buyers' Tax Credit), it's really not as simple as talking about personal responsibility, especially considering that high housing prices directly effect the price of rentals. And actually you should be concerned that we are heading for a real-estate bubble. Amazingly, macroeconomic effects have the potential to ruin you personally, or many other people, all of who were as financially responsible as you were! I acknowledge that macroeconomics will have an impact on the market but to say it may have the potential to ruin me is pretty chicken little there. Everything has the potential to ruin people. Why fret about things that's beyond your control? It's just better to say pish posh chicken sauce to those issues and focus on trying to weather yourself those potential hardships the best you can. I don't think that's a lot to ask for. Personal sacrifice is not a straw man, though. There are things that people can do to try to make a difference in their lives. Struggling in your life? Look at where you can make the necessary cutbacks in order to try to keep your head above water while you pay off your debt or at least try to escalate to a better standard of living. Cable tv, cell phone plans, eating out (mcd adds up to a bit), type of food you're eating, transportation cost (my $600 piece of poo poo was to serve an example that you do NOT need to get a brand new car with 1.9% financing), going out/entertainment cost. Face it, if you're having dire issues with your finances, luxuries are something you cannot afford. I do acknowledge this is fairly basic and doesn't take serious issues into consideration; however, there are assistance available out there for people who need it. THC posted:Isn't QB the same goon that was working in the payday loan racket and was complaining about PS workers being able to bank their sick days? I think if everyone was smart and responsible then you'd be out of a job, bub No, that's someone else. I never had an issue with banking sick days. I find it to be a good way to protect productivity in the workplace. I wish I could compel the VP and GM to enact the same practice here but they're fairly stubborn about it. Would have made my job easier. I never once said I expected nor are the people required to make the same sacrifices I did. It was an extreme sacrifice on my part that resulted on having no social life whatsoever. I'm glad I did it because it made a difference between being debt free in 1 year of work and 5 years of slowly paying it off. It's not for everyone but there's no reason why people can't take that step to look for an extra job even if it means doing something they hate (fast food, janitorial work, etc). If you honestly can't find yourself living within your means even after all the cutbacks then something has to give. Either pursue another source of income or a larger income. Helsing posted:I've been attending bimonthly community meetings in the Jane-Finch neighbourhood recently and even as a bleeding heart Canadian leftist I have been pretty shocked by the degree of privation and desperation that people regularly experience in this community. I'm not trying to judge you or pretend that I know what your life circumstances are but I can definitely tell you that having $600 in cash that you can spend on a car, or being in a position where you can afford to go to school (even if you get there with loans and part time jobs) does indeed put you in a position of privilege that is far beyond the reach of hundreds of thousands of Canadians. Without going too much into it, I have had serious limitations that most Canadians do not have to go through and made the struggle that much harder. Maybe that's the reason for my perspective on this but I'm getting the feeling that you're implying that these opportunities fell on my lap and I just went with it. If so, that bothers me and is entirely untrue. Yes, I was fortunate enough (if you consider commuting from Maple Ridge to Richmond to Port Coquitlam to Abbotsford and then Maple Ridge or some mix to get some sleep as fortunate). If that's not your intention, then my apologies. I will admit that I could have portrayed my post in a kinder way that does not imply "gently caress the poors" but I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to poke you guys a little bit (ok, a lot). One last clarification before I move on: I don't think poor people are the architect or author of their own misery. I do acknowledge there are hardships that are beyond their control; however, it would be foolish to blindly accept that without acknowledging there are assistance available for those people and that they are also co-writers of their own stories based on their own decisions. Not trying to change the topic, but I was wondering if anyone here could shine any light on this news article I was reading. http://m.news1130.com/2013/06/18/abbotsford-school-district-looks-at-scrapping-letter-grades/ I looked at the SD42 website but couldn't find the answer I was looking for. What would this mean for post secondary admission? Would they still do letter grades/percentages at the end?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:No, that's someone else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:My last post was done partly in jest to poke some of you guys a little bit so there was some exaggeration. I'm not saying people shouldn't try to have control of their finances, or that people shouldn't plan for the future. My problem is that framing this as an issue of personal responsibility and temperance misses the point. These macroeconomic conditions didn't come out of nowhere, there were specific incentives created by the Federal government as a way to stave off recession. You can't push the economy down a certain path, then turn around and blame people for it. I'm not personally planning on holding debts in the near future, and I've advised my parents to pay off their remaining debts now, because I see bad times ahead, but even if you or I weather an economic downturn relatively unscathed, there are thousands of people who won't, often through no fault of their own. I'm not even talking about people spending on excess luxuries, I'm talking about people who work 40-60 hrs a week to make end meet, who've seen their income stagnate in recent years while rent kept increasing, and who are just managing to get by. They exist, I know quite a few of them personally from jobs I've worked, and all it would take is one good shakeup (say from drastic public sector cuts) for hours to be cut of for them to be let go, and for a lot of suffering to happen. These people are not profligate spenders, and EI won't be enough to tide everybody over when jobs become scarce all around. I'm not even talking about the whole public service staggered pay thing, since as stupid as that is I don't really think the public service is the best example of urban poor I'm talking about. But people should care about this stuff, not just out of simple human decency or empathy, but because these structural conditions have the potential to destroy wealth and dampen growth, and that affects everyone. The economy is not some magic uncontrollable force, and the government absolutely has effects on the way economic growth happens, and the Harper government, for all it's self-congratulating on the subject, has not performed well. E: Sorry, I don't mean this to sound accusatory. It's just the personal responsibility meme pisses me off quite a bit. We can acknowledge that people are to a certain degree masters of their own fate without pretending that it's all totally reducible to individual choices. quaint bucket posted:Not trying to change the topic, but I was wondering if anyone here could shine any light on this news article I was reading. Looking around, I can't seem to find anything more specific either. I'm iffy on this as a project. Letter grades or percentages are a useful generic indicator of a student's standing against an average. As much as it does sort of lump everything together in a single metric, which can be problematic when trying to distinguish between different outcomes for students I don't see how you could operationalize this in a way that would be usable for all of our education institutions, even just at the level of evaluating different schools or teachers, let alone for the much more fragmented process of post secondary admission like you said. I sort of get why people would want something more personalized, since a letter grade really doesn't tell you all that much about why a student is succeeding or failing, but sort of personal focus seems more appropriate to teacher student interactions, rather than scrapping a relatively functional indicator like letter grades. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
LingeringDoubt posted:Sorry, but I just caught up on the two weeks pay thing. I had to read that article several times. It is extremely poorly written, and comes with a significant bias, making it sound like this is some heinous act. I really don't think what they've depicted is what is actually being enacted. Full disclosure: I'm in absolutely no position to know. That's an interesting observation. Once when I worked for a large grocery chain thi sis how it was done: you had to submit your timesheets the day of payday (Wednesday) - and all sorts of headaches would arise for those who needed to flex their schedules for that day. Even now, working for a government agency, we're on a two-week period, as our work schedules can be all over the place. Between flexing our hours, emergency overtime, travel reimbursement, and program funding changes it would be a huge headache not just for us, but for our HR department as well. Heck, in some cases, it can take 30-45 minutes just putting all the data into our timesheets. It's nicer to be able to sit back and have time to submit it when we can fit it into out schedule, rather than "Oh crap, it's 4:30 - gotta write my timesheet now oh what there's a trail derailment-oh crap, gotta get to that first"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
LingeringDoubt posted:Apparently, the government pays their employees for the same day as the cheque is issued. I can't see anybody in their right mind ever doing this because, as the article states, there is no way to take into account different payment situations. What if you need to work an extra hour of overtime on payday? "Oh well, too bad you've already been paid for today." It just doesn't make any sense. I'm working for a staffing agency right now (as in, for the agency itself, not as a contractor) and all salaried paycheques are up to the day worked. To use the language of payroll, places that pay a week or two later have a payroll that is "in arrears". Not all businesses do. If someone needs to work an extra hour of overtime on payday, that single hour of pay would be in arrears until their next pay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:I looked at the SD42 website but couldn't find the answer I was looking for. What would this mean for post secondary admission? Would they still do letter grades/percentages at the end? Hahahahha Gooden literally says in that article that universities can adapt to this new "system" of not judging people at all  .Yes, I'm sure UBC will admit someone on the basis of their entire mark being "It was a pleasure to have [name] in my class"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:I guess some people just can't handle the idea of making sacrifices. I too have been in a similar position. I've worked my way up from minimum wage to a quite decent wage that I can live off of and am going to school full time. However, I recognize that my entire upbringing and the great level of input and interest in my life on the part of my parents has made it possible for me to have the best possible chance to be successful. I can't really imagine having been anywhere near the situation I'm in right now had I had lovely parents who didn't care, a kid or a debilitating disease. That's the important thing about economic policy: you can't just use your personal experience as evidence for how a system works or should work. So many people who grow up poor stay poor because they've always lacked support.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Hahahahha Gooden literally says in that article that universities can adapt to this new "system" of not judging people at all
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
THC posted:Maybe SFU will take them. We still have letter grades but our transcripts don't show percentages and our numerical percent marks (which may or may not be accessible in any one of several different online systems depending on the professor) are often wildly out of whack from our transcript letter grades. Once I got C+ on my transcript for a course where my actual grade was 40 percent. There's no rhyme or reason, no transparency. Grading on a curve could explain that. Letter grades can also be helpful for stuff like that. If the average was lower than expected, everybody might be bumped up so that the statistical distribution made sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
Yeah the way it worked in a couple classes that I TA'd at SFU was that the prof looked at his or her grade distribution and basically decided where the cutoffs were going to be for A's, B's, C's, etc. It could vary significantly from course to course. I got a few angry e-mails from students after one semester because the prof made the final a little too easy and so students with grades of like 94% were getting A's instead of A+'s.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
SFU is weird like that because it's entirely up to the prof's judgment. I've been in a class where getting 80% on the midterm was a C because she decided that grade curving meant direct competition with your classmates. It's a very idiotic way to do things, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
Bell curves are the stupidest thing on the planet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
I was talking to my mom yesterday about the problems with the Canadian economy and the issues with the housing market, and trying to convince her that it's a really bad idea for her to be making large-scale consumer purchases because she's one of the exact Canadian consumers who are driving the economy right now with consumer spending based on home equity, and she really is living off of the her home equity line of credit. I was explaining to her the issues with the market, things like the Krugman graph that shows we're now more overvalued than the US was in 2008, and so on. Her response was literally "Well, I don't live in Toronto or Vancouver, and I have a nice house in a good neighbourhood next to a park, so my home will keep increasing in value forever." No, mom. No, it probably won't. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Bell curves are the stupidest thing on the planet. "Hmm, the class mean was a 40. There's no possible way that I'm a poor instructor or the tests lacked validity, It's just that every semester I get whacky students with weird population means entirely by chance!" A valid, reliable test will result in a natural bell curve. These instructors have it completely rear end backwards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
Gus Hobbleton posted:SFU is weird like that because it's entirely up to the prof's judgment. I've been in a class where getting 80% on the midterm was a C because she decided that grade curving meant direct competition with your classmates. It's a very idiotic way to do things, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:"Hmm, the class mean was a 40. There's no possible way that I'm a poor instructor or the tests lacked validity, It's just that every semester I get whacky students with weird population means entirely by chance!" Yeah, but I have to say that a few times I've appreciated bell-curving, since it proved that it was the teacher, not me. And some teachers are just never getting kicked out for being poo poo, since their departments don't care (ECON  )E: Specifically, it was one ECON class with a prof who, memorably, told us our degrees were going to be worthless due to the over accreditation of ECON majors, and then proceeded to talk about his book, No PhDs Please, in monotonous, heavily accented English. Can't say I was sorry to see I had gotten an A despite my actual percentage mark. Somehow, he has not been removed yet. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 00:48
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Hahahahha Gooden literally says in that article that universities can adapt to this new "system" of not judging people at all There are a couple of IB schools (which don't operate on a letter grade or % basis) in the province, so the universities can certain use different standards when judging students. However, it definitely isn't clear that Abbotsford is actually using a standard for this. Or how much it differs from the other district test piloting the "system". ocrumsprug fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Did a little more research. It sounds like it's strictly for kindergarten to intermediate. If that's the case and secondary is being left alone then this system isn't a bad idea if it helps parent be more engaged and aware of kids' positives and shortcomings before they move onto grade 7-12. So a good move, theoretically if you assume the parents will be more involved. I tried to somehow connect this to poor people but came up short because I'm distracted by my kid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Bell curves are the stupidest thing on the planet. As a Eng Sci grad (Chem Option 9T0) whose life was ruled by bell curves, they do have some negatives. Anyone who had Don Ivey for PHY180F knows precisely what I mean. On the other hand it does stop grade inflation when they bell every course to a 65 mean. I know my 75 average was harder to get than your 75 average, frankly. I beat smarter people. Rust Martialis fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
I work for the Department of National Defense right now (as a temp. casual, but this is the case for the permanent workers there too) and we all already get paid for work we did two weeks ago. Ie. we get paid on the fourth week of the month for the work we did in the first 2 weeks of the month.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:There are a couple of IB schools (which don't operate on a grade or % basis) in the province, so the universities can certain use different standards when judging students. However, it definitely isn't clear that Abbotsford is actually using a standard for this. Or how much it differs from the other district test piloting the "system". IB still gives out grades based on standardized tests, they're just on a 1-7 score. Universities basically just translate those into % grades for admissions purposes. (edit: but you're right that universities each use their own standards to judge IB scores) Cordyceps Headache posted:Yeah, but I have to say that a few times I've appreciated bell-curving, since it proved that it was the teacher, not me. And some teachers are just never getting kicked out for being poo poo, since their departments don't care (ECON Haha, I've had such similar experiences, it's good to hear Econ profs are universally bad at teaching (with a few wonderful exceptions). I think the only reason it's a challenging degree is that there's a lot of moderately difficult mathematics being taught incredibly poorly on a mostly ad-hoc basis, at least at my school. From second year on the only meangingful learning I did came from frantically copying down proofs off of whiteboards while the prof zipped through them at breakneck speed, interspersed with incredibly low-content business and finance classes. Guy DeBorgore fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 15:10 |
|
|
Oh hey, could this be having an impact? "The Nanos survey asked Canadians how satisfied they were with the prime minister's explanation of what he knew about the cheque and when. Seventy-two per cent said they were dissatisfied or somewhat dissatisfied. Only 27 per cent were satisfied or somewhat satisfied."  "The survey also found a high amount of awareness about the Duffy-Wright matter, with more than 95 per cent of respondents aware of the controversy. When asked to assign blame over the controversy using a 100-point scale, respondents assigned 43 points to Duffy, 32 to Harper and 25 to Wright."  "But Nanos said the negative results for Harper in the Senate case won't necessarily damage his performance in the next election, scheduled for late 2015. When asked which factor would be most important in assessing the prime minister's performance, 45 per cent of respondents said they would consider his track record on the economy, compared to 39 per cent who said they would focus on his handling of the controversy."  Of course not!  It's all a distraction from JOBS JOBS ECONOMY ACTION PLAN 2015™.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 03:36
|
|
