Recently, while monitoring a test, I recalled a story told by Pat Hartwell about a pair of linguistic anthropologists working among the people of Africa. They went to an illiterate farmer with several items, kitchen utensils, say, and fruits, asking the farmer to group the items. The farmer grouped them using what educational researchers might call an operational schema: the knife with the orange, the spoon with the broth, the tea ball with the tea. Why did you do like that? they asked. After some thought, the farmer replied, That's the way smart people do Next, the researchers asked, How would a stupid person do it? The farmer immediately regrouped the items into more abstract groups-tools, fruits, vegetables. That's the way stupid people would do it (1987, 4). I remembered this story when I stepped out of my classroom while students were taking a test. On returning, I looked in the window before opening the door. I saw several students talking among themselves and looking over items on the test. Quickly, I considered all my options, the usual ones first: I could go in, make a scene, and throw the culprits out; I could talk to the students individually; I could see that points were deducted from the offenders' scores. I stood there, my hand on the doorknob, considering my next step. What I began to realize, as I stood there watching, was that the students weren't copying answers; they were discussing options. They weren't avoiding the test; they were solving it. Faced with an approaching deadline, a difficult task, a threatening situation, and a system that valued outcomes, they were putting their heads together to work out the best solutions they could. As I watched and saw and understood-over about fifteen seconds, my
This paper introduces four metrics for quantifying the adequacy of retirement savings, taking into account all major sources of retirement income. We then apply them to projections of expected future retirement income streams of a representative sample of the Australian population aged 40 and above. We find that omitting one or more pillars of savings significantly biases estimates of retirement savings adequacy. We also find that the four metrics are only weakly correlated with key commonly used indicators of financial well‐being, in particular current income and net worth. Our analysis also points to several shortcomings of the widely used income replacement ratio as an indicator of savings adequacy.
apital Protected Equity Products (CPEPs), described in detail in the following section, have become a popular financial product in Australia in recent years.They package together, for retail investors, a loan for stock market investment and protection against exposure to losses in the capital value of that investment.The investor incurs costs reflecting interest on the loan, 'facility' fees, and protection costs (typically aggregated and described as interest costs), and has the benefit of share ownership financed by borrowing and protection against capital loss.One reason for the popularity of such products has been the opportunity they provide to invest in shares paying franked dividends, while claiming interest expenses on the funds borrowed as tax deductions.Because the costs of the CPEP are not separately identified, CPEPs have provided (despite the efforts of the Australian Tax Office) the opportunity for investors to exploit inconsistencies in the tax treatment of complex financial products arising from differences in the tax treatment of ordinary income (and expenses) and capital gains (and losses).A Federal Court of Australia (2002) ruling in Firth v Commissioner of Taxation meant that all of the costs of a CPEP to the investor could be treated as an expense for tax purposes, despite some part of that cost being, in effect, a capital item.In April 2003, the Federal Government announced that an interim approach would be put in place for the tax treatment of CPEPs, pending an amendment to the law (Australian Treasurer, 2003).Details of the interim approach were announced in May 2003 (Assistant Australian Treasurer, 2003).At the time of writing (mid 2005) consultations between public sector officials and the finance industry on a replacement approach were underway.This paper contributes to the public debate on the appropriate tax treatment of such products (see Boadway and Keen, 2003 for a general analysis of alternative taxation treatments of complex financial instruments).It is argued that finance theory (and the basic structure of Australian tax law) implies the following:• The 'quoted' interest, or total, cost of a CPEP should be split into: (a) a 'pure' interest component; (b) a 'facility' cost for marketing and operating costs and profit of the CPEP provider; and (c) a payment for capital protection.• The tax treatment of the three components should be as follows:'pure' interest cost should be deductible by an investor as an expense;
The financial management practices of Infrastructure Funds listed on the ASX have been subject to substantial criticism, particularly in the light of the extremely poor performance of many of the funds in the current financial crisis. It is argued here that some of the practices commonly criticized can be consistent with principles of good financial management – although actual practice has involved deviations from those principles. Since the listed infrastructure fund model is an innovation with many good characteristics, it is important that the failings exposed by the current crisis be correctly identified such that improvements to the model can be effected through better regulation, governance and market discipline.
The proliferation of computer viruses, Trojans, and other malicious code in recent years has presented a serious challenge to higher education computer services support programs. Outside of higher education, most IT departments mandate anti-virus policies through central management of end-user systems and software. In an academic environment where student systems are owned by the users and not institutions, however, such an approach is not always tenable, and the weaker forces of user education, persuasion, and service level agreements must prevail.This paper describes the anti-virus intervention strategy devised and executed by FAS Computer Services at Harvard University during the 2000-01 academic year. The approach chosen focused on both providing innovative technical approaches to combating computer viruses and carrying out an intensive and targeted publicity campaign to carry the anti-virus message to every student on campus. In this paper, the rationale for the chosen approach is examined vis-a-vis rejected alternatives, and strategies and goals for future interventions are presented.
Aim To review the international evidence base on interventions to support the mental health of family carers of children with brain injuries in low and middle income countries (LMIC). Methods Searches were conducted with five electronic databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) using search terms related to “family carers”, “brain injury”, “children” and “low and middle income countries”. Studies were independently screened using predetermined eligibility criteria by two authors. Data were extracted from included studies using standardised data extraction and quality appraisal tools. These data were then subjected to narrative synthesis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to govern the review process. Findings One study met our inclusion criteria and described an acquired brain injury called nodding syndrome which occurs in Sub-Saharan Africa. The study was conducted in Ghana and provided group-based psychotherapy to carers and their children. As such we found no study which sought to solely support the mental health of family carers. Conclusions There has been a lack of focus in the literature on the mental health of family carers of children with brain injuries in LMIC. Considering the vital importance of caregivers in supporting their children it is imperative that service providers and researchers devise programmes to better meet their needs. The mental health of family carers should be better supported to improve their overall wellbeing, which will in turn improve the wellbeing of their children.
