Academic Performance Index Puns

My school is a charter school-- we have no language arts curriculum, do no test prep, and do all instruction through inquiry/project-based thematic units. Compared to other schools in the area, we have much less funds--mostly because we must pay rent for our site.

We don't have a lot of ELL's, but when compared to similar schools, we still scored 10/10.

We're a parent cooperative, so there are always parents helping in the classroom and around the school. Teachers have a lot of autonomy--as long as we're hitting the state standards, we have a lot of say in how we teach and run our classroom. All students get instruction from a music teacher, an art teacher and a Spanish teacher.

Our formula for success: Trust and support teachers to do their jobs with a minimum of interference. Involve parents in everything (all teachers and parents are trained in Positive Discipline). Give a well-rounded education--arts, music, foreign language, etc. Let student inquiry drive a large part of the curriculum.

Nice to end the year on a good note :)

I'm about to embark down the road of parsing/modeling the data in the California API and am wondering if anyone has already done this and would be willing to share?

If not, I will share what I do of course.

SOLVED: Re-installed Windows 10 Home (Instead of Windows 10 Pro) and no more issues.

TL;DR Pink lines of death, stuttering every single second as evident by the frame time graphs.

Edit:

Hooked it up to my roommates RTX 2070 system. Works flawlessly - so nothing wrong is broken inside the Index. Now to figure out how to make it run flawlessly on my system.

2080 Ti

Ryzen 3900x

32 GB Ram

Windows 10

Tried:

Turning off G-Sync and Dropping main monitor refresh rate from 144 to 60

Beta steamvr, stable steamvr

DDU, New Drivers, Old Drivers (Multiple times)

Don't have any nvidia overlay

Set power management to high performance

Setting my gpu clock speed to be consistently boosting (stupid idea but someone suggested this was guaranteed to work - nope)

Turned off Hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling in Windows graphics settings

Turned off Variable refresh rate in Windows graphics settings

Turning off monitors

Unplugging unecessary things

Unplugging Index System

Restarting PC

Various steamvr video settings, different refresh rates

Turning on / off MSI Afterburner

Turning off various RGB software and processes

Turn on / off Xbox Game Bar

Turn on / off Game Mode

Turn on / off Motion Smoothing + Super Sampling

Flat games such as CS:GO work fine

Airflow in my case is great, beefy cpu cooler and gpu temps were kept in check even when I was playing metro exodus on high settings so that shouldn't be it

No resolution in sight

Frame times: https://imgur.com/g0UurZm

fpsVR Measurements: https://imgur.com/a/U9c0iKo

Task Manager while SuperHot is running: https://imgur.com/a/sBw0eXf

https://preview.redd.it/uqzkgl1js2a81.png?width=265&format=png&auto=webp&s=c6d2aaf8ca279a09b3c2854861864b21aefd7f4b

Like for example if the students in a school are not performing academically with proof through their testing scores, does the school lose funding or gain funding?

And no, I'm not talking about one student failing. I'm talking about an overall academic performance score.

I've been looking at investing some of my money into a multi-family syndication like Praxis Capital but I question how to properly evaluate their historical performance against the performance of the s&p 500 or total stock market index fund? It seems like some of their historical investments have been as high as 19% which would obviously put them at a much better advantage than an index fund. Just curious on what people's thoughts are as far as performance is concerned and if they prefer multifamily syndications for their immediate cash flow and tax efficiency over investing in index funds?

For context I do mostly invest in index funds today.

Hi reddit,

I am hoping someone has experienced something similar and might be able to calm my nerves.

I developed severe anxiety and depression throughout my PhD and only decided to address it after i'd submitted my thesis and defended. I began seeing a psychologist which has helped in the sense that I feel like I am being proactive about my mental health, but i've only had a few sessions, so I still have a long way to go.

The problem is my depression seems to have taken a toll on my intellectual abilities. I struggle to retain information or remember an article I’ve read only a day ago. It takes me hours to put together one paragraph and even then it ends up being so poorly written. I struggle to contribute to most conversations because my thoughts are so muddled up. At times it feels like I’m illiterate. My psychologist says that depression can do that - having negative thoughts about yourself all the time can hinder your performance.

Basically, I feel like an idiot. I’m living with constant brain fog. I really enjoy academia, or at least I used to when I felt I could function. Does it get better? Has anyone experienced this before and managed to get back to their pre-depressed self?

Edit: Thank you to everyone who took the time to reply to my post. I have not been able to respond to everything, but I really appreciate the kindness, advice, and support you have given me. I am also happy to see that it has helped others, too!

With 2022 just on the horizon, I thought it would nice to compare the market return of the NEPSE index vs the top 10 stocks by market cap and mutual funds. We'll also look at which sectors outperformed the index and which didn't.

To keep it simple, we'll look at returns over the past two years from 1 January 2020 to 11 December 2021, i.e. the start of the bull market.

Which sectors outperformed the index?

The NEPSE Index returned 121.14% over the last two years which is represented as the red line below.

So using that as a baseline, let’s look at:

• Which sectors outperformed the NEPSE Index?
• How did the top 10 stocks (according to market cap) perform?
• How did mutual funds perform vs the NEPSE Index?

1. Which sectors outperformed the NEPSE Index?

Finance, Trading and Hydro were the three top performing sectors

2. How did the top 10 stocks (according to market cap) perform?

Surprisingly, most of the 10 biggest stocks according to market cap underperformed the index.

The clear winner from the top 10 stocks by market cap was Citizen Investment Trust (CIT). Its shareholders saw their portfolio grow by as much as 205.84%* (rights issue and bonus issue).

Coming up a close second is NABIL Bank with above market returns of 187.61%. Shivam Cements followed in third with a solid return of 147.01%.

3. How did mutual funds perform?

Surprisingly, seven out of the 10 open-ended mutual funds outperformed the NEPSE index returns.

I guess my question is did you beat the NEPSE index?

If so, then obviously, you’re doing something right. Care to tell us?

If not, what lessons did you learn over the past two years?

You can find the full article here: NEPSE Index Performance 2020-2021: Did You Beat The Index?

Merry Xmas & Happy Investing!

Disclaimer: Adjustments were made to calculate returns and account for rights shares and bonus share issuance. And there could be errors.

Other than getting exposure to US and International indexes within the ETF, aren't Canadian banks usually the best performing sector of the Canadian economy? Oil/Natural Resources can be up and down as is the same with Tech.

I haven’t been employed anywhere else but I’ve seen the above happen at my company twice now and I was just really curious. I’ve always thought they prioritized the latter but it seems like our organization has a different perspective.

Context: Employees A and B have better backgrounds than Employees C and D but aren’t the best-performing among the candidates. C and D barely have absences and have met the target quotas more times than A and B but came from less popular universities and companies. All of them do not have connections within the company but both A and B got promoted while C and D retained their positions and have to wait for the next batch of promotions.

Was this uncommon and was our organization wrong for that? Or does this happen at other companies too? Thanks!

EDIT: I would just like to clarify that I am NOT Employee A, B, C, or D. I am not qualified for a promotion yet since I need another year or maybe more but this is just my actual observation. I may have also sounded a bit biased in this post since I personally saw how C and D worked and thought management did them dirty. I probably missed some stuff behind the scenes. Thanks!

After doing some light reading on recently published papers on lithium metal cells, I've come to a realization that the 3.4 atm and 0 pressure operation that QS sees as a minimum standard are much more important and novel than many think. The vast majority of similar academic efforts where cells are cycled for at least 1000 cycles, at room temperature and with similar efficiencies and current densities (1C or higher up to 5-10C) are done under conditions of absolutely extreme pressure. The lowest so far that I have seen is 1-2MPA, or 150-300 psi or 10-20 atm. Compositions range from ceramic to sulfide separators to full solid catholytes. The dendritic suppression in these experiments may be a split factor between the pressure and the chemical/structure of the test materials which makes a sub 1MPA cell that operates at 1C, 25Cel, 1000+ cycles all the more impressive. (For reference, the often posted/cited harvard sandwich blt cell operated at room temp with spectacular cycling and charge resistance/conductivity, but with 75MPA-250MPA of pressure (700-2000ATM).

For me personally, a nominal pressure application is probably the greatest limiter to high battery operation. Higher temperatures can be facilitated by circulating waste heat from inverter/stator coolant, or even just by normal operation of the battery. But you can't siphon pressure from somewhere you have to apply it statically and additional weight from pressure apparatuses would exponentially increase weight and decrease gravimetric/volumetric density.

And now for the obligatory address to competition, pressure is conspicuously the one metric that is rarely mentioned by peers in the space. Just like in the 3 ideal gas laws, if you increase temperature, and decrease charge rate you can lower the operating pressure as the lithium is softened by the temperature and ions dont stack into dendrites. If you increase the pressure you can lower temperature and increase charge rate near exponentially since the lithium is also compressed into a pseudo-liquid gel state. Going off an assumption of the worst, QS' battery lost about a rough 10-20% of its performance by dropping ~3 ATM for its 0 pressure, 1 layer cell.

If we assume the worst for competitors and place their pressure at say 6ATM/90PSI, roughly double what QS is operating under (for the sake of argument, i estimate at least greater than QS' 3ATM or else a competitor would have gladly released pressure data to one up a rival), halving their opera

Today I received a notification from grainger detailing the above. While I am on academic probation, I took over the 12 credit hour minimum, passed every single one of my classes (lowest grade a C+) and scored a gpa of 3.15. Can someone please explain if I’m missing something or if this has to be a mistake on their side because I’m panicking and super confused.

Thanks!

I'm pretty new to dividend growth investing, but it seems like a great way to value a company. What really made an impression on me was this chart https://www.indexologyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/aristocrats.jpg, I found of the dividend aristocrats index.

I've always been wary of that period between 2000 and 2008 when the market showed no real return and the dividend aristocrats' performance seemed to avoid going sideways in the same way the s & p 500 did. Though the above chart seems like that's mostly calculated from backtested data from what I can tell, as the dividend aristocrats index wasn't created until 2005.

Anyway, I recently found another backtest in a report of the Dow Jones Dividend 100 index (and it's international version) from August 2021 found here https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/education/practice-essentials-dividend-strategy-with-quality-yields.pdf (I currently invest in SCHD the etf that tracks that index) that claimed that a backtested portfolio would have returned 17.2% during the period of August 2000 to September 2002. This is incredible when you consider how much the broad-market version of that index lost during that same period. (-44.33%)

I'm curious about how accurate these backtests are considered to be. But I'm especially curious about periods of time like the Tech bubble because I believe the Tech sector is in a bit of a bubble at the moment, and this period of time we are in seems to me to resemble the period between 1995-1999 quite a bit. I don't feel like enough people are looking back at market performance in the past to determine investment decisions, they are just buying what's been going up the most at the present time. How many of you see a Tech bubble happening, and how many of you see quality dividend stocks as a good way to avoid the fallout of a market bubble?

This is something that has been boggling my mind for a while.

From the SP500 Investopedia: “The value of the index is calculated by totaling the adjusted market caps of each company and dividing the result by a divisor. Unfortunately, the divisor is proprietary information of the S&P and is not released to the public.

However, we can calculate a company's weighting in the index, which can provide investors with valuable information. If a stock rises or falls, we can get a sense as to whether it might have an impact on the overall index. For example, a company with a 10% weighting will have a greater impact on the value of the index than a company with a 2% weighting.”

Okay this makes sense, so if a company that comprises 10% of the index (lets say the index price is currently $100) stock doubles in a day, than all other stocks else being equal, the index should rise by $10 to a new value of $110.

In theory as the SP500 individual stocks move up and down throughout the day, so does the index, SPX.

However if a large institution were to come in and unload 3,000 lots into the SPX, the price of the index would drive down as bids are taken out. However, no one has gone around to each of the 500 stocks and pressed sell an equivalent amount. So how is the index still tracking the collective stocks performance at that instant?

Maybe it helps in academia or on the contrary makes studying harder for you? Share your experience.

Preamble: Ahh, a tale as old as time. Two legions of believers destined to be eternally entwined in battle! On one side we have those who swear by the active fund managers and their superior returns. On the other, we have those who trust the good old index fund with all their life savings!

Pick your sides. It’s about time we put this argument to rest.

Data

It’s one of those rare times where somebody else does all the legwork for your analysis. Almost all the data for this analysis is from the 2020 SPIVA U.S Scorecard report. SPIVA is a division of the S&P Global and has been considered as the de-facto scorekeeper in the active vs passive debate. They have produced a report every year since 2002. They have done all the dirty work of collecting and cleaning the data required for the analysis [1].

Analysis [2]

We will be analyzing the following types of funds

We will be then calculating the following

a. Percentage of funds underperforming the benchmark across time periods (1, 3, 5, 10 & 20 years)

b. Average fund performance (1, 3, 5, 10 & 20 years – Both Equal and Asset Weighted)

The above analysis should give us conclusive evidence on which approach is better both in the short as well as long term.

Results

The results are not pretty! Except for the lone one-year period for small-cap funds, most actively managed funds underperformed their corresponding index in all the other time frames across the different funds.

As we can see, these differences only become much more drastic over the long term. If you consider the Large-Cap Funds, over the last 20 years, 94% of the actively managed funds have underperformed S&P500.

A similar story is repeated for Small and Mid-cap funds. We can conclude from here that it’s very unlikely that the fund you choose today will be able to beat the corresponding index over the long run.

But this is just one aspect of performance. What if you consider the average returns produced by the actively managed funds? Would they beat the market returns [3]?

https://preview.redd.it/cbriauooyih71.png?wid

Hey y'all,

I've mostly made my mind up on this. But I do value the input of all of you fine folks. So, here goes.

I am semi-non-trad; took two years off after high school; switched majors three times; am now 23 with just under two years to go in my undergrad.

Currently, my plan is to finish my degree and prereqs in the summer of 2023. Then I will take 3-4 month to study full-time (40 hours a week type shit) for the MCAT and take it in Dec 2023/Jan 2024 to apply during the 2024 cycle.

So this is where my question lies. Should I push myself to take the MCAT while I'm in school? So that I get it done early enough to apply in 2023.

I am generally an A student (AMCAS cGPA 3.82, AMCAS sGPA 3.99). But I've achieved this by knowing my limits with school and volunteering. Honestly, I'd be worried about my GPA and MCAT performance if I was juggling studying for the two at the same time.

What do you think?

Is applying a year earlier worth potentially inhibiting my ability to score well on the MCAT and maintain As?

Like I said, I'm pretty much decided on taking the time I think I need. But I wanted to ask this question because I feel like there are a lot of people on this path that I've met that have stretched themselves too thin for the sake of getting things done faster.

Thank you for your replies in advance.

Happy new years :)

-494

Last January I built my current pc- which has a 5900x, rtx3080, 32 gigs of ram, 2 nvme ssds - basically everything a person really needs to not have to worry too much about performance. Shortly thereafter I ended up getting the index, and everything ran great at 144hz with perfect tracking. I could run basically anything I threw at it without issue. I took a break from VR for about 8 months due to not having an ideal location for roomscale VR, and since returning I've noticed a bit of stutter running titles like pavlov and operators at the "normal" 150% render resolution. Even alyx was stuttering in certain areas. I updated drivers, which actually broke my precision X1 settings and forced my gpu to cap at 30% power or 65C, but after correcting that I still notice relatively poor performance compared to what I'd expect. Does anyone have an idea as to what I might be missing? I've already played with the "new" supersampling settings and everything seems to check out. I've actually noticed no performance hit in non-VR titles.

I only have a laptop, but it’s a pretty beefy one. I’ll list some specs: Intel Xeon W-10855M CPU 2080 Super with Max-Q 64 GB of ram

Would this be able to run H3VR smoothly? Help much appreciated!!

ask for disability information? Is it safe to share info with firms, or must one be discriminating with what kind of firms/employers deserver, or inversely, cannot be trusted with such info.

Throwaway because he knows my username.

Basically as the title says -- should I give him the 3060 and take the 5700 or are the two pretty even and I should leave well enough alone?

I've been working/gaming on a rickety ol' rig I built back in 2015 or so. It's been failing, so this year I thought to build a modest machine. Given all that's going on, I didn't think I'd be able to replace my R9 380, but Newegg Shuffle came through and the Gigabyte card is on the way.

He does a lot more gaming than I do, and the Index is slated for him. I've been on the R9 for so long that either card will be a huge, welcome step up.

Swapping cards is usually a fairly straightforward process, but without getting into the backstory, just assume it'll be a medium-sized PITA (tracing down a bit of instability that I can't have on my work machine). If there's only a minimal performance difference between the cards, then it's not worth the time to jump through the hoops to switch them. BUT, if it's more than an incremental step, then the better card should go to the machine that will take advantage of it more regularly.

Hoping to get some direction here since this is kind of specific to the incoming Index; all other games play wonderfully enough on his machine, but I assume the Index/VR games will be the more taxing than most. Even if the base cards are similar in performance, does the extra 4GB of VRAM in the 3060 make a difference?

Thanks!

Me (20M) and my girlfriend are both enroled in the same course at university.

She keeps comparing my grades with hers and exposing my approach on studying methods.

Lately this has been a recurrent topic, since our grades play a huge roll in deciding what opportunities we can choose upon in a near future.

I feel unconfortable when she starts this type of conversation, specially because she always brings it up in a public situation among our group of friends. I laught it off, but it trully hurts inside...

I'm afraid to talk about this with her, since it may also hurt her and I don't know if that's the way she copes with the fact her academic results haven't been that great.

She has been very impactful in the recent sucess on my academic journey, but I believe it doesn't give her the right to use that as a way to justify what she says about it.

How should I approach this situation? 😢