Airplanes, Tutoring, and Values

After re-reading Raising the Bar, (June's book of the month) I moved on to what will probably be July's book of the month - Mavericks at Work. This one relates to education as well, though it's related to business education more than general education/inspiration like Raising the Bar. However, I came across an early passage that I'd like to highlight as something CK strives towards. Southwest has always been one of our business "idols" for certain reasons, chief among them mentioned below:

Southwest has become such a mass-market icon that it's easy to lose sight of the utter distinctiveness of its approach to the airline business. The company's direct point-to-point route system avoids the high costs and endless delays of the hub-and-spoke system around which the mainstream industry is built... Yet low fares don't mean sullen service. Quite the opposite: the company's gate agents, flight attendants, even its pilots, are famous for their flashy smiles, showy personalities, and corny sense of humor... This is a company whose distinctive value system, rather than any breakthrough technology or unprecedented business insight, explains its unrivaled success.

Southwest flourished because it reimagined what it means to be an airline. Indeed, Roy Spence insists that Southwest isn't in the airline business. It is, he argues, in the freedom business. Its purpose is to democratize the skies - to make air travel as available and as flexible for average Americans as it has been for the well-to-do.

Our website is a great tool that allows us to keep costs low, but it's not by any means a breakthrough technology on the level of Google's search engine. We may not have the corny sense of humor of Southwest, but we're on the same page as them when we believe that our low prices don't mean "sullen service." And of course we're trying to reimagine what it means to be a tutoring company. As stated before on this blog, on our company website, and in our communications, our goal is to democratize tutoring - that is, make tutoring and mentoring available and affordable for the average family. And if we keep our company values and sense of philanthropy along the way, then we will begin to be satisfied with our journey.

Apples to Apples revisited

In an earlier Apples to Apples post, I discussed (and showed findings) how going to one college over another has little to no effect on the future success of a student. Namely, I want to revisit this portion of my previous post:

Now, you would think that the more ambitious student is the one who would choose to go to Penn, and the ones choosing to go to Penn State might be a little less confident in their abilities or have a little lower family income, and both of those factors would point to people doing worse later on. But they don't.

I witnessed firsthand that this is the case during my weekend at Colby. I found out that some of the students I met had been accepted to "more prestigious" schools but had gone to Colby for various other reasons. These reasons ranged from wanting to be closer to family to financial reasons (such as Colby offering more money in scholarships than other schools). One particular person's story stuck out at me because that person chose Colby over other colleges for financial reasons, made the best of their time at Colby, graduated with great grades and has managed to get a full ride to graduate school. It just really goes to show you that it all comes down to the student, not the school, in determining future success.

And related to this topic, this article in the NY Times about Tony Jack and how he has overcome obstacles to achieve success at Amherst is absolutely wonderful.

Game Theory, Clif Bar, and Giving Back

I spent this past Memorial Day weekend in Waterville, Maine attending Colby's graduation ceremony. Aside from getting free books to read and helping friends move out, I also got to hear Mr. Schelling, the Nobel prize winner for his work on game theory, speak during graduation.

While I didn't find his commencement speech particularly relevant (he spoke about nuclear proliferation instead of giving advice, which he was against doing) I got to thinking about how game theory relates to CK and other companies such as Clif Bar. In particular, I wondered what role the ideas of game theory play when a company makes decisions to "give back" or "take care of its community."

I think too many companies define the optimum strategy on an economic profit basis versus a total return basis that impacts not only the bottom line but also the environment and the community. A company that looks at the big picture, not just economic profit, is Clif Bar and their commitment to the community.

On the drive back from Maine, I got to thinking about how we could do a better job looking at the big picture. I spoke with Orion and we both agree that we want to start a 1% program where we give 1% of our profits at the end of the year to two non-profit organizations of our choice. If you have any suggestions for non-profits, please let us know! And if you have other ideas for giving back, please feel free to contact one of us.

In other news, I finally get to hear G. Felda Hardymon speak today - I'll post about it first thing tomorrow.

And in further news, congratulations to Rizwan for his recent outstanding tutoring. He is one of our great tutors who helped one of his students get a very good SAT II score. Well done!

Linking Back: Cost of Students, Principals, and Video Games

In what I hope will become a useful feature of this blog, at the end of each week I will provide links from the previous week about topics that didn't quite get the attention of a full post.

- CNN reported yesterday that the U.S. spends an average of $8,701 per student.

- Newsweek had a great article on the role of principals in education. Newsweek has recently been criticized for their school rankings, which place heavy emphasis on AP courses attempted (and not enough on actual AP scores, as "The Numbers Guy" at the WSJ notes in this post).

- This was an interesting post off a comment one of the bloggers made about academic rigor (or lack thereof) in schools.

- A post on the role of video games in child development. I found it particularly interesting since my parents didn't let my brother and I get a gaming system until Playstation 1 came out. I 've always wondered what effect that had on our development, if any.

- Lastly, this is a great post on the impact teachers can have on a young student.

Democratizing Tutoring

Part of what we're trying to do at CK (College Knowledge) is to democratize tutoring. We were inspired by the idea of "democratizing something" after reading about Henry Ford and his Model T. His goal was to make cars available to "any man earning a decent wage" and we felt the same could be done for tutoring.

So our first thought was "why is tutoring so expensive?" We were surprised that the high cost of tutoring didn't arise from tutoring companies paying their tutors more; in many cases, the larger tutoring companies charge exorbitant amounts and pay their tutors anywhere between only 15-25% of the total cost charged to clients. From the beginning, we decided to challenge them by accepting lower profit margins as a company that would result in fairer, higher wages for our wonderful tutors - we pay 50% or more of the final tutoring bill to our tutors.

Another thing we noticed is that the tutoring companies in Atlanta were all charging $50 an hour and up. Why was no one offering a lower price? It seemed like the companies were quietly in agreement that none of them would charge less than $50 an hour in Atlanta. We decided, before even officially starting the company, that we would charge 40% less and so came about our decision to charge $30 an hour.

Even though we save our clients 40% or more on their tutoring costs, our current clients can all tell you that they're very satisfied with CK tutors and that we have not sacrificed quality. Every client we've had so far has signed up for follow-up tutoring sessions; this is further evidence that our handpicked tutors are not only top-notch students but also very good at tutoring and mentoring. Our goal going forward is to keep adding satisfied clients and keep our operations as efficient as possible to pass on huge savings to our customers; we face many choices going forward but know that we will continue to prioritize the right things and won't seek growth just for growth's sake. We welcome any suggestions along the way to continue making CK a success.

Improve Grades / Be More Productive

Improving grades and being more productive are two separate things. You can have good grades and not be productive or vice versa. As such, here are two helpful links to be taken with a grain of salt:

How to improve your grades from WikiHow. This is by no means a definitive answer, but it's a start and I like the basic message to try your hardest and don't be afraid to seek school help if you need it. Oh and has anyone noticed the similarities between WikiHow and Ask.com? I know that WikiHow is collaborative, but the two services otherwise seem the same.

How to be more productive from Wired. This is also not a complete answer, though the main message is that organizing oneself will lead to more productivity. Though this is a commonly held belief, I remember thumbing through A Perfect Mess and thinking Eric and David made some good points which would counter the Wired article I just provided.

A review of A Perfect Mess from Amazon:

Flying utterly in the face of conventional wisdom, the authors turn the world of organization on its head to examine how messy systems can be more effective than highly organized ones. Neatness for its own sake, they say, not only has hidden costs in terms of man-hours that could be spent doing other work but it turns out that the highly touted advantages may not even exist. More loosely defined, moderately disorganized people and businesses seem to be more efficient, more robust, and more creative than the obsessively neat.

GJA inspires CK

Great news - I'm currently in contact with GJA (George Jackson Academy) to potentially speak to their young boys about seizing opportunity and overcoming adversity, among other things. You can read this great article in which the NY Times profiles the school to get a better idea of what they are about.

Based on what I've read in articles about GJA and based on what I've heard of their students, I think I may learn more from them than they would from me. However, here's to a win-win situation; I'll keep you all posted as more details are finalized and hopefully something gets planned.

Book of the Month (June): Raising the Bar

I’m going to start a monthly post (about a week before each new month) on a book I feel most everyone can benefit from and should read for that month. Even though reading an entire book in just a month can be challenging, this will be a good experience for all the blog readers; at worst, you’ll get a synopsis at the end of the following month when I blog about the pros, cons, and lessons learned from the book.

June’s book of the month winner is… “Raising the Bar” by Gary Erickson and Lois Lorentzen. The book is about the lessons that Gary Erickson, founder of Clif Bar, learned during his life. I recommend the book because it combines stories and lessons about leadership, independence, business, the outdoors, and a multitude of other things. I like to think of the book as a series of go anywhere romps through his (and his company’s) fascinating life. I promise you won’t be disappointed by the book.

Around this time next month I’ll post thoughts about the book and a brief synopsis, along with further questions to think about. In the meantime, happy readings!

Braylon Edwards (again) and other news

While perusing through the web, I noticed ESPN wrote a feature article on the Braylon Edwards donation to education news I blogged about a few days back. The article is a good piece of reporting with some extra information on Braylon and his foundation.

On the other end of the spectrum, this column on page D1 of the WSJ a day ago is great at illustrating another issue - having too many opportunities. It's not a grave problem, per se, but it's something that can become a troublesome issue. Here's an excerpt which can be applied to anyone's life in helping to avoid over scheduling:

How do you decide what activities to keep and which ones to cut? It's wise to take a measured approach; Ms. Cooper had Taylor complete her dance season and recital this spring, to teach her to finish what she starts. Beyond that, Alvin Rosenfeld, a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and author of "The Overscheduled Child," recommends dividing activities into two groups -- those you regard as essential, such as religious school, and those seen as optional. Schedule the first group, and allow the child to select from the rest, he advises.

Education as the critical problem behind inequality

Instead of only linking to this great NY Times piece that many of my readers can't get without going through the free online subscription process, I'm going to link to a great blog post that talks about the article. The great post can be found here from the guys at Marginal Revolution.

A telling excerpt:

Income distribution thus depends on the balance between technological progress and access to college and postgraduate study. The problem isn’t so much capitalism as it is that American lower education does not prepare enough people to receive gains from American higher education.

Bottlenecks currently keep more individuals from improving their education. Professor Katz has suggested changes at multiple levels, including additional college aid, more-accessible community colleges, easier financial aid forms, more serious attempts to identify and retain top teachers in high schools and school voucher experiments.

It doesn’t suffice simply to increase the number of people in college; rather the new students must be prepared to learn. There is, however, no single magic bullet.

Blogs are everywhere!

It was only a matter of time before colleges started using blogs. It's not surprising, of course, given that these tools for communication give the colleges that utilize them a competitive edge. It's also not surprising given the general proliferation of blogs; I recommend visiting Technorati for some insight into the popularity of blogs.

Of course, the proliferation of blogs brings some downsides. The first is that some blogs just aren't very good; of course, I'd venture to say that those generally fade away or end up becoming better. The second downside, at least when it comes to blogs and education, is that colleges may end up censoring the blogs they're so keen to adapt... I understand a blog would go over the top if, for example, it were specifically attacking someone without merit; however, that doesn't seem to be the case when you read the article and discover that some colleges censor what they don't like. An administrator censoring a blog because they don't like seeing something negative about the college, especially if it's true, defeats the purpose of having a blog.

It's sometimes tough to balance a blog when it comes to reporting, commentary, and business interests. I try to have a good balance and not have overly heavy commentary, I try to see all sides of an issue, and report what I read as fairly as possible. I also try not to advertise our company blatantly, since that would be plainly annoying and not the main purpose of this blog.

I emphasize that the main point of this blog is to provide timely news, commentary, and tips on education and tutoring. If I ever stray from that (hopefully not!), please let me know.

Braylon Edwards: $1 Million Donation to Education

Braylon Edwards, wide-receiver for the Cleveland Browns, announced a $1 Million scholarship donation to 100 8th graders in the Cleveland area that will pay for them to go to college. That's $10,000 per lucky student.

The story points out that the funding will also pay for tutoring and mentoring; it's clear that Braylon Edwards and his foundation also "gets it" when it comes to the importance of supplemental education. It's too bad our company is not yet in the Cleveland area, because we'd love to work with his foundation to provide quality, low cost tutoring and mentoring.

I love reading positive stories, especially when athletes give back to their communities.

Apples to Apples

I've always wondered if I sacrificed any future opportunities by having gone to Georgia Tech instead of a "more prestigious" school that I had gotten accepted at, like Williams College. I've come to believe that I didn't sacrifice any future successes, as I feel I made the most of my time at Georgia Tech. This article by Malcolm Gladwell, author of "Blink" and "The Tipping Point", confirms that belief. I strongly recommend reading this piece to get a better idea of the differences (or lack thereof) that a "prestigious" school can have on one's life.

I recommend skipping section 2, as it's long and a bit slow. Section 3 is the heart of the matter and here's an excerpt from that section:

To assess the effect of the Ivies, it makes more sense to compare the student who got into a top school with the student who got into that same school but chose to go to a less selective one. Three years ago, the economists Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale published just such a study. And they found that when you compare apples and apples the income bonus from selective schools disappears.

"As a hypothetical example, take the University of Pennsylvania and Penn State, which are two schools a lot of students choose between," Krueger said. "One is Ivy, one is a state school. Penn is much more highly selective. If you compare the students who go to those two schools, the ones who go to Penn have higher incomes. But let's look at those who got into both types of schools, some of whom chose Penn and some of whom chose Penn State. Within that set it doesn't seem to matter whether you go to the more selective school. Now, you would think that the more ambitious student is the one who would choose to go to Penn, and the ones choosing to go to Penn State might be a little less confident in their abilities or have a little lower family income, and both of those factors would point to people doing worse later on. But they don't."

Learning for Learning's Sake

This is an excellent post from the "Moving at the Speed of Creativity" blog, though I warn you that it's a bit long. In it, Wesley Fryer writes about the positives (and negatives) of teaching after the high stakes testing periods have been completed (this period of "relief" occurs only in May).

I remember when I was in high school at Galloway that the fun really began once the AP exams had come and gone. I probably learned less about my subjects in the few weeks after the AP exams (and before the wonderful summer holiday) but that was more than made up for with extensive learning about fun, more abstract topics. Galloway is good at generally avoiding "teaching to the test", which helps because student's learn for learning's sake. This May period after AP exams that Fryer blogs about were particularly wonderful.

It'd be great if more schools placed less emphasis on testing and grades and more emphasis on learning. Of course, parents, colleges, and employers generally want accountability, so this is probably going to continue being an interesting conundrum.

Graduation Rate Tool

I spent some time over the weekend testing out a graduation rate tool provided by edweek.org. I like to think of the tool as a weaker version of Google Earth, except this tool only provides information on graduation rates. In fact, I'd venture to say Google Earth will likely be adding this sort of data set to their already extensive database, providing a better mapping feature than Ed Week.

Even then, I found the tool wasn't quite as effective or innovative as marketed. It's worth a look, of course, and you can access the tool here.

An excerpt from Ed Week about their tool:
The EPE Research Center calculated graduation rates for each district, as well as every state and the nation as a whole, using data from a single federal data set. The Cumulative Promotion Index, developed by Research Center director Christopher Swanson, estimates the probability that a student in the 9th grade will complete high school on time with a regular diploma.

Perhaps something to get more excited about is this quote from Ed Week:
In June 2007, the EPE Research Center will launch the next generation of this online mapping technology, which will bring new and more extensive information on graduation rates to the public.

Will their next generation tool match the ease of use of Google Earth? And will they improve their "custom research reports" so that they're better organized and more relevant? I guess we'll find out in June...

Reading (A lot)

Earlier this year, I went through a particularly fast reading phase. I read over 40 books in less than 6 weeks, which you can imagine would have been quite expensive had I not borrowed most of those books from friends. Normally, I read on average 2-3 books a week, which means I will have read anywhere between 140-190 books this year.

The types of books I read are generally new books in business and investing, but I often venture out and read many other types of books; regardless, I haven't touched many "classics" and older books in a while. But yesterday I discovered something that should help out every avid (or aspiring) reader - Project Gutenberg.

Project Gutenberg is the largest legitimate collection of free books, available online and for download, and encompasses books by authors ranging from Twain to Shakespeare to Dickens to Vonnegut, and so forth. I encourage all readers to give the website a visit!

Paying for Extracurriculars

I like to meander through the comments after interesting blog posts, and I found one that's worth putting here (albeit edited for grammatical errors) and then discussing.

"I'd also like to hear about how people make financial decisions regarding kid's extracurriculars.

We have three children and each takes music lessons, participates in a sport and gets tutored in math -- and goes to summer camp. And I do feel like most of the time I'm acting out of fear (so very scared that somehow my kids are going to be left behind by all the kids who started with math tutoring when they were three and could do long division before they entered kindergarten, etc. etc. etc.)

Lately, my husband I have had some long, hard talks about this whole philosophy -- that extra lessons and tutoring and so forth will somehow provide "insurance" against your kids ending up uneducated, unemployed, etc. I guess the question is -- does it? And even if it does, is it worth it?

As I said to my husband the other night, "I could easily spend ALL of our money making our kids faster, smarter, and so forth, but when's enough enough?" (Here's an example: I didn't even know you COULD take private swimming lessons -- until I realized that my kids were the only ones on the swim team who hadn't had them.)"

She raises a few great points. My opinion is that if tutoring and mentoring is affordable, then by all means it should be a supplement to any child's education. However, tutoring and mentoring should never replace traditional instruction and a parent should never go overboard with scheduled tutoring sessions. I'd recommend no more than 2 to 3 hours per week for elementary and middle schoolers; no more than 5 or 6 hours a week for high schoolers (this includes time on weekends for SAT and other prep).

Most everyone needs free time, including even older kids, to avoid burning out or becoming apathetic towards their schoolwork. The same could be said for college aged students, though I've observed this age group is better at taking breaks. Perhaps this is a result of a newfound independence from parental scheduling.

Refuting the college acceptance rate angst

I read a VERY interesting post in the Washington Post. Here's the link to the post and a quote.

"When the number of applications grows faster than the number of applicants," Carey explained in his piece, "it creates a false sense that admission standards are getting tighter. Imagine 20 students, each of whom applies to five schools and gets into two. Now imagine if the same students each applied to ten schools and got into two. The outcome for the students is the same: two acceptance letters. But the schools report lower admission rates, and the odds of admission seem worse."

Higher Education Act

"As Congress considers reauthorizing the Higher Education Act, it may want to consider the example of states like Louisiana and require more states to take a similar approach."

I never thought Louisiana would become a progressive state for higher education, but this recent article from Education Sector raises a lot of good points and mentions some of the things Louisiana is doing right (and that other states are doing poorly).

Another follow-up post

A week or two ago I blogged about high schools (and younger) needed to focus on security just like colleges are now doing. So I was interested to see this article in the Washington Post about locks, buzzers, and intercoms being installed in the local Virginia schools.

When I was just starting out in high school, the Columbine shootings had just occurred. I remember not worrying about that sort of thing occurring at my school because it didn't seem like the sort of thing could happen again. That feeling may have been due to being naive, or innocent, but I never thought we'd get to the point of transforming schools from places of learning to miniature fortresses. It's already tough enough to get through school; students nowadays have to worry about so many things that earlier generations, even my own, didn't have to worry about. I'd wager that today's high school and middle school students are nowhere near as naive as I used to be at their age.

Picking their brain...

Following up on this previous post about taking advantage of opportunities to pick smart lecturer's brains, I had an interesting discussion yesterday on my flight to NYC with the lady next to me.

She began with some small talk and then explained that she was going to NYC for some training. This lady owns her own company but was going to get training from Pfizer from some world renown doctors. The interesting thing was that she was paying for her flight from St. Louis, paying for her own hotel, and paying for her other expenses to hear these doctors talk!

Naturally, I had to double check and ask if she thought it was worth it to which she replied, "Are you kidding me? I'd pay way more just to pick these smart people's brains. This is priceless." This just goes to show the importance that even accomplished businesspeople place on continual education!

I wonder how much I would pay to hear certain lecturers, such as Steven Levitt, Christopher Browne, or Warren Buffett...

Now that's what I'm talking about...

I've often made the case that government's inefficiencies often stem back to their inability to recruit the brightest young talent. For example, a young and bright individual generally would go work for a private corporation, law firm, etc. than go work for the government; the pay and career opportunities are so great in the private sector that they're very hard to ignore. Also, it seems that the private sector also offers the best care and programs for personal development. So if the government sector is generally not getting the best young talent, and retaining them, then the government is not getting the brightest and perhaps most motivated people.

So when I saw this article in the Washington Post about how government is trying to win over young talent, it made me think that finally someone's light bulb went off. However, I think it'd be a lot cheaper for government agencies to develop something along the lines of a "Star" program.

Let's say you were trying to recruit 50 new analysts in a certain government department - it would probably be easier to do so if you said to each of the prospective analysts that the top 10% of the incoming class gets admission into the government's "Star" program after a certain period, say 1 or 2 years. In 2 years, after measuring each analyst's performance based on whatever criteria, the top 10% of the analysts would enter the "Star" program, get recognition, get a significant pay increase, other benefits, and more continuous training. The chance to get into the program would likely drive all 50 new analysts to work harder and faster for that 1-2 year period, which would greatly help out this particular department at a relatively low additional cost. This seems economically better for the government departments than paying millions in the repayment of student loans, though it is true that repaying student loans is a step in the right direction of improving government recruiting efforts.

Speakers, Teachers, Professors

I've had the great privilege of meeting with many great speakers, teachers, and professors but when I found out this morning I would get to hear G. Felda Hardymon speak, I got very excited. Besides being the guy who made initial VC investments in The Sports Authority and Staples, he's supposed to be a great and engaging speaker from whom I should learn a lot.

I've also had the privilege of listening to other great professors such as Dave Buckner at Columbia and Dan Gode at NYU. Both were excellent at taking difficult and at times boring information and turning it into something exciting. I wonder what makes them such great speakers, aside from being very personable - it must have taken them years to develop their talents or perhaps it was a talent they have had all their lives. Fortunately, I get to listen to Dave again this summer at an SEO training session.

The point of this post is if you have a chance to listen to an engaging speaker, professor, or researcher, or if you're lucky enough to receive training from them, then do it! Even if you're busy you should try to attend speeches, free training, info. sessions, and the like. Many times colleges such as GT have free sessions for the general public - all anyone has to do is go.

The two aforementioned professors may not be as famous as the CEO's and CFO's I've met, but they sure have taught me a lot about "hard skills" such as finance and more importantly about "soft skills" such as how to be an engaging, inspirational speaker.

College Reject Record Numbers

Now that people have finished mailing in their college acceptances, I felt I could now tell readers that this year colleges rejected a record number of applicants, making this the toughest year to get into an undergraduate program.

Take this passage, highlighting some of the most difficult schools to get into while pointing out three big reasons for the rise in, well, competitiveness:

Dartmouth College had a record 14,176 applications, up 2% from last year. It accepted 2,165, or 15% -- its lowest acceptance rate in history. Harvard University drew a record 22,955 applicants and accepted a record low 9%. At Stanford University, the number of applications rose 7% to 23,956. It accepted 10.3%, down from 10.9% last year.

Several factors are fueling the rise in applications. One is population trends: The number of students graduating from high school has risen each year since the 1995-96 school year, according to the National Association for College Admission Counseling. The U.S. Department of Education predicts that the trend will continue until at least 2013.

Another is the growth in international students. At UNC-Chapel Hill, for instance, recruiters went abroad for the first time this year, making trips to Shanghai and other Asian cities to promote the college. UNC had 736 foreign nationals apply this year, up from 590 last year. The university admitted 167 of them, up from about 125 a year ago.

A third is the growing use of the Common Application, a form that can be completed online and sent to a number of admissions offices far more easily than paper-based applications. More than 300 schools accept it.

So this requires applicants to become "stronger" in their push to get into the best possible schools, but perhaps there are solutions on the side of the universities. Perhaps expanding class sizes (while hiring more faculty) would help solve part of the problem - the richest universities should have little problem expanding their faculty, at least on the economic side of things, while they should be able to avoid "diluting their product" with quality professors from the U.S. and abroad.

Maybe there needs to be a federal or private program to push for the training and education of more professors - it seems like there could be a crunch in the near future, solely based on my perception of supply and demand.