Financial Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Financial Report - Essay Example The objectives of this financial report comparison of the two companies are to enable us to find out the performance of each of the two companies in their markets of operations. This will be done through the comparison and interpretation of financial ratios, which will inform the decisions as to whether in the company an employee can be rewarded, decisions of borrowing or not as well as when the companies are due for expansion and so forth. This is all done through financial analysis, which is the selection, evaluation, and interpretation of Financial data along with other pertinent information to assist in investment and financial decision making.This analysis will involve the calculation, presentation, and interpretation of the financial ratios of both companies. The ratios to be considered will be grouped in terms of Liquidity Ratios, Profitability ratios, Activity Ratios, Financial Leverage ratios and Shareholders ratios. The liquidity ratios will provide information about the tw o companies to meet their short term and immediate obligations. On the other hand, profitability ratios provide the amount of income by each company of the sales they make. Activity ratios will show the stakeholders of the companies on the company’s ability to manage its assets efficiently hence its ability to operate into the future. There is also the Financial Leverage ratio, which provides information on the company’s degree of commitment to its fixed financial obligations and their ability to satisfy such obligations. Lastly, we will look at the shareholders ratios of the two companies, which are aimed at describing to the shareholders the company’s financial position in terms of the amounts per share of stock, held by the owners of the company (Kingfisher plc - Investors & Media - Results & presentations - Preliminary results for the year ended 28 January 2012. (2013, March 3).

Telecommuting Essay Example for Free

Telecommuting Essay Historically, Americans have slavishly followed the corporate structure of working in an office and relaxing at home. In the 1980’s when computers begin to catch on so did the idea of a flexible work arrangement. In researching, one found that the implementation of telecommuting in the workforce has greatly improved the performance of businesses, increased employee satisfaction, and helped the environment. This research is based on historical data recorded from the 1990’s to present day in reference books, journals, and web based articles. This paper intends to expound on the ways telecommuting can be harmful or beneficial in the workplace. Telecommuting refers to workers doing their jobs from home for part of each week and communicating with their office using computer technology. Telecommuting is growing in many countries and is expected to be common for most office workers in the coming decades. This paper will discuss the origins of telecommuting, define the term telecommuting, and predict the future of telecommuting in the U.S. How will society be affected by the growth of telecommuting? One will discuss the benefits and hindering aspects of telecommuting in the work place. Will companies save money initially and hurt their business in the future? Often times before looking to the future it is helpful to glance at the past. States without labor laws relating to homework fall under the jurisdiction of the US Department of labor and its Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938. The work-at-home sourcebook by Lynie Arden discussed how the FLSA initially prohibited seven industries from using home workers. Congresswoman Olympia Snowe of Maine introduced the Home Employment Enterprise Act in the House of Representatives. Congresswoman Snowe told the House, â€Å"cottage industries play a vital role in the economy of the state of Maine, large parts of New England, and other areas of the nation. The independent nature of homework and the unavailability of alternative employment opportunities make working at home ideal. It is time to safeguard the freedom to choose to work at home† (Arden, 4). Before the bill was voted on, prohibitions on industrial homework in five of six industries were lifted by the U.S. Department of Labor in 1989. This along with Alvin Tofflers image of the electric cottage helped change the social construction of the workplace. Between 1980 and 1990 the annual consumption of personal computers rose by approximately 900 percent and expenditures on personal computers rose by 1100 percent (Biocca, 1993: 81). Professional occupations clutched onto the idea of using the computer as a space-flexible work tool. Eventually a new identity was carved out for this employee niche as well. People who work at home are enjoying a newfound respectability. In the early 1980s, many executives shied away from being called home workers. But it is now increasingly accepted behavior. With this acceptance the identity of home workers has changed (Braus, 1993a: 42). Respectability as a computer operator, according to this view, has been regained and has been transferred into the home as well as in the office. Ann McLaughlin, Secretary of Labor, said â€Å"Workforce flexibility is a critical element of our effort to create jobs, enhance the quality of work life for American workers and improve our competitive edge in the world markets. The changing workforce demographics demand that we provide employment opportunities that allow workers the freedom to choose flexible alternatives including the ability to work in one’s own home† (Arden, 5). Politicians with foresight were in tune with the coming change and the introduction of telecommuting into the workforce world. Many people define a telecommuter as anyone who works outside of a traditional office, whether at home, in a satellite office, or even out of a car. The Midway Institute for telecommuting education, a group that consults with businesses by conducting feasibility studies and implementation seminars, defined telecommuting as â€Å"an off-site work arrangement and that permits employees to work in or near their homes for all or part of the work week. Thus they commute to work by telephone and other telecommunications equipment rather than by car or transit† (Shaw, 6). Telecommuters can work from home, work from a telework center, or use a concept called hoteling. When working from home employees may have a home office that may contain the same kind of equipment that you get in a central office. Telework centers are typically satellite offices located some distance from the companys main office. Telework centers have an advantage over home offices in that technology and computer equipment can be shared rather than purchased separately for each telecommuter. Telecommuting employees work a couple of days a week from the telework center on a rotating basis, ensuring that computer terminals and workstations are in constant use. Equipment in home offices lies dormant when the telecommuter comes to work at the main office. Hoteling is a form of telecommuting used most often by sales staff who dont need a fixed desk in an office, but must have somewhere once a week to pick up mail, plug into the companys main database, or meet a client. This employee may check in an office in the north of a region one week, using a vacant desk or conference room for a couple of hours, and telecommute from the southern part of the region the next week. These three kinds of telecommuting are defined by location and structure. Telecommuting can have a downside and is not for everyone. Some people feel isolated without the regular social contact of the office and find it difficult to be motivated. Other obstacles include not being able to stop working at the end of the day, being distracted by the refrigerator or TV, and friends and family that don’t respect work time. There is no direct supervision of teleworkers, which could cause diminished productivity. The remote access needs of telecommuters could cause a security issue depending on the nature of the business. Sometimes removing the presence of a very positive or knowledgeable employee out of the office to telecommute could affect the morale of other team members (Career Builder). There are several reasons why employees and employers are thinking about telecommuting. The number one reason for employees is that people have begun to see that work isnt everything. They want to be better integrated with work and personal lives, and telecommuting is one way to free up more time. Other reasons include the desire to break through the glass ceiling, increased job stability, or just dislike for the traditional corporate structure. Telework give companies another avenue to do their part with reducing air pollution and being compliant with the Clean Air Act mandated by the federal government. One of the largest sources of pollution is the automobile. In heavy traffic automobiles are moving slower and causing even more problem to our environment. In most cities construction is taking place on roads to increase the size to help with this problem, but an even better solution is to encourage people who can to telecommute, so we will not need additional highways, parking lots, and airports in the future. Companies can enhance their recruiting efforts because they are not limited to hiring employees in a specific geographic area. Telecommuting helps companies achieve savings with real estate costs and overhead (Career Builder). Companies can grow without the need to create additional workstations or build new office spaces. The option to telecommute eliminates the number of employees who resign because they want or need to move to a new location. It is predicted that telecommuting will become an increasingly popular work option in many businesses and industries, and its usage is expected to increase in the future due to new innovations in computer and communication technology. This trend is driven by several factors. Linda Shaw, author of Telecommute! Go to Work without Leaving Home, wrote that the labor pool of employees with specific talents will shrink, making employers more willing to make concessions to keep valued employees happy. A smaller labor pool combined with an increasing demand for highly skilled laborers has fueled employee-driven change in working environments. Scarce, highly skilled workers have begun to demand more flexible work arrangements, especially as they choose to live farther and farther from their employers (Shaw 18). Shaw and other observers also note demographic changes within the American work force as a factor in the growth of telecommuting. These analysts contend that new generations of workers are less willing to sacrifice time with family than their counterparts of previous eras. This desire to spend more time at home and avoid long commutes is advertized as a key factor in making telecommuting an attractive benefit. Finally, new technologies have made working from home a viable alternative. With the advent of high speed modems, fax machines, voice mail, powerful personal computers, electronic mail, and cell phones to name a few, workers can now perform their jobs without losing touch with employers and customers. We are on the edge of a new era of telecommunications that will impact our lives and how we work and how we become productive in the 21st century. Society will be enhanced with workers that are happy with their work and life balance, the environment will be made better and companies that invest time in their telecommuters will continue to help their bottom line. Telecommuting may prove to be an effective means to enhance our lives and improve our productivity on this new frontier and I conclude that the strategy should be to find ways to enhance the capabilities for future telecommuters.

Comparison of Tsar and Communist Rule

Comparison of Tsar and Communist Rule Tsarist rule in the years 1856 to 1917 and Communist rule to the death of Lenin and the death of Stalin both depended on high degrees of central power and control by the state. The similarities between the two forms of government were therefore much greater than were the differences. How far do you agree with this judgement? Both Imperial and Soviet Russia have a long and well documented history of autocratic rule. However, Russian autocracy in its various forms has been far from consistent in either its organisation or outlook. It is this inconsistency in structure and policy which has given rise to differing schools of thought. On the one hand is the view that the fleeting and unfulfilled promises of both the liberalist-socialist February Revolution and Bolshevik October Revolution of 1917 witnessed nothing other than a transition from one form of despotism to another. On the other hand lies the theory that the Revolutions of 1917 caused the destruction of the Russian feudal system, empowering the masses to invest their authority in a democratically elected central representative form of government, at least in appearance if not in essence. In order to examine the two forms of government and their attributes, this essay uses a comparative approach in its discussion of the absolute monarchism of Tsars A lexander II, Alexander III and Nicholas II, and to the proletarian dictatorships of Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin. It will introduce the organisational structure of the monarchical and republican forms of government, and present a snapshot of Russian society in both cases. It will then analyse the similarities and differences of state control over various facets of society, and summarise these arguments in a logical conclusion. At the time of the accession to power of Tsar Alexander II in 1855, the Russian Empire was a hereditary absolute monarchy ruled by the Romanov dynasty. The Tsar promulgated and enforced laws personally, albeit acting on the counsel of trusted advisers. The Tsar also controlled the official state religion of Orthodox Christianity through the Holy Synod. Through his personally appointed counsellors, the Tsar wielded absolute power over most national institutions, including the military, the judiciary and the press. Subjects of the empire were segregated into different social classes on various rungs of the feudal ladder, from the nobility down through the clergy, merchants, cossacks and peasants. The majority of peasants were classed as serfs common labourers bound to the land, with no political representation. Imperial Russia had a proportionately larger population than its European counterparts of Great Power status, and the majority of its peasant population eked out a meagre exist ence below the poverty line. The Russian economy was based on a primitive form of agriculture, and as such economic growth was sluggish, lagging way behind the rapidly industrialising West, with which Russia was unable to compete financially. State intervention in industry tended to be more frequent than elsewhere in Europe, though in certain sectors it developed with private initiative, often foreign capital. In any case, due to the late onset of industrialisation, Russia remained largely agricultural until well into the twentieth century. Certain aspects of state control were relinquished in the latter half of the nineteenth century, particularly during the reforms of the 1850s and 1860s, in the areas of government, education and the judiciary. In 1861 Alexander II announced the emancipation of around 20 million serfs. Local commissions controlled by the landowning gentry gave rise to emancipation by giving land and certain privileges to the serfs, though stopping short of freedom per se. Very few former serfs moved outside their village commune, and they were required to make redemption payments to the government over a period of almost fifty years. Landowners were compensated in the form of government bonds. Local government was reformed shortly afterwards in 1864, whereby the European part of Russia was reorganised into different regions and districts in a devolution exercise. Local government became fully responsible for health, education and transport, signifying a move away from centralised power. In the same year, judicial reforms took place in most urban centres. The major change was the introduction of juries into the courtroom. The judiciary functioned fairly well, though the government lacked the financial clout to enforce the measures, meaning that local peasant justice remained relatively unaffected, with little interference from the central government. State control remained fairly strong in the military, marked by the government’s desire to effect the transition from a large standing army to a reserve army, made possible through the training of the newly emancipated serfs. In other areas, the State bank was founded in 1866, all school officials remained nominally subordinate to the Ministry of Education, and censorship laws were relaxed in the 1860s. Soviet Russia presents a more modern, if not altogether different, concept of state control. In February 1917, a Provisional Government of liberal socialists ousted the autocracy with the intention of establishing a democratic form of government in a war-ravaged society. At the same time, the radical Bolsheviks representing the working classes called for nationwide socialist revolution, and eventually seized power from the Provisional Government in November of the same year. Only after a long and bloody fratricidal war did the Bolsheviks consolidate power and establish a one-party Communist state, which officially came into being in December 1922. The Soviet government initially attempted to centralise the economy through Lenin’s New Economic Policy (NEP). Threatening encirclement from capitalist powers, Lenin stressed the importance of rapid industrialisation through direct state control, as dictated by Marxist doctrine. However, these efforts did not come to fruition, and some private enterprise was permitted to coexist with the heavily nationalised industrial sector. Yet following Stalin’s accession to power in 1928, the state assumed control of all existing businesses and initiated intensive programmes of industrialisation in the form of three pre-War five-year plans. In agriculture, the state seized peasants’ property to establish collective farms. The plan proved hugely unpopular and caused much hardship. Millions of common labourers starved to death or were murdered during periods of forced collectivisation. Social unrest continued well into the 1930s as Stalin embarked on a purge of his own party. This gave rise to a campaign of terror not dissimilar to that witnessed in Revolutionary France, leading to the imprisonment and/or execution of anyone who was suspected of being an opponent of the Communist regime. Literally millions of citizens were expunged from all sections of society. However, there were certain advantages of this rigorous state control. Stalin’s industrialisation programme required that workers be adequately educated. This led to an increase in the number of schools. More importantly, for the first time women were given equal status in education and employment as men, marking an improvement in household income and family life. Universal access to health care gradually became readily available, increasing the standard of living and life expectancy. Engineers, architects and medical personnel were sent abroad to learn new technologies, and exchange programmes enabled foreign input into the expanding Soviet knowledge base. The outbreak of the Second World War served only to intensify the Stalinist system of state control. Forced labour rapidly accelerated Soviet industrial output, allowing the USSR to outstrip Nazi Germany’s initial advance, while conscription swelled the ranks of the Red Army, enabling the military to push back the eastward thrust of the German army in the winter of 1941-42. The post-War era saw no reduction in this trend as the Soviet government sought to rebuild the infrastructure decimated by war and roll out its policy of extreme levels of state control over the countries of Eastern Europe placed in its sphere of influence in the post-War settlement. It was not until the death of Stalin in 1953 and the accession to power of Nikita Khrushchev that repressive controls over government and society were eased. So how do the two forms of pre-Revolutionary monarchical and post-Revolutionary republican autocracy compare? Let us first examine the political ideologies on which the two forms of state centrism were founded. The initially obvious assessment is that they were almost as far apart on the political spectrum as is possible, from the ultra-conservative monarchical despotism of Imperial Russia to the extreme left-wing one-party Communism of the Soviet Union. The monarchical despotism of the Tsars was concentrated in the person of the Emperor alone. He functioned as both Head of State and Head of Government, and was responsible for all branches of government. The serf majority of the population had no political rights or representation, and only the most fortunate amongst the nobility and intelligentsia had sufficient status to make their views heard. Admittedly, given the vast expanse of Russia and its poor transport and communication links under the Tsars, logistics would always dictate that imperial power was unlikely to filter down to every citizen from the Baltic to the Pacific. However, individual liberties remained severely restricted, if not non-existent. On the other hand, Soviet Russia was a proletarian dictatorship in pursuit of the ideal of world revolution. The Bolshevik effort in the civil war was founded on the belief that only a coherent and secretive organisation could overthrow the government. Following the revolution, this belief was transposed to the machinery of government, in that only this kind of organisation could resist foreign and domestic enemies. According to Marxist-Leninist doctrine, this revolutionary esprit could only be achieved through the efforts of a Communist party which assumes the role of revolutionary vanguard, achieving its aims through a disciplined organisation known as democratic centralism, where party officials discuss proposals but do not question decisions once they have been made. Similarly, the electorate were simply expected to approve of the laws enacted and policies pursued by the party they had voted into power. Any form of dissent, either expressed or implied, was punished in the most se vere manner. Let us now turn to the practicalities of state control. As noted previously, levels of state control in Imperial Russia witnessed a marked decline throughout the second half of the nineteenth century. Admittedly, continued state control and supervision, heavy financial obligations, and communal regulation of peasant affairs made life in the countryside seem not entirely different from that prior to the emancipation. The gentry still filled high posts in the army and bureaucracy and occupied a dominant position in the new institutions created by the reforms; and government officials viewed independent actions on the part of Russian society with much the same suspicion and distrust that they had previously. However, the reforms made a genuine difference, in the sense that the granting of personal liberty to the peasants freed them from total dependence on the landowning gentry, and it encouraged social mobility. The educated minority of the lower classes of society were able to engage in education and banking. This new direction in government policy gave Russian life new dimensions and possibilities of social and economic development. Either way, this revolution from above certainly marked a watershed in Russian history, and fuelled the embryonic Revolutionary movement in its build-up to the events of 1917. A measure of the success of the reforms is that the government survived them unscathed, unlike those of Gorbachev in the 1980s. The immediate post-Revolutionary period witnessed conditions which were not dissimilar. Lenin’s Communist government faced the immediate challenges of severe economic recession and working class hostility. Alienated by the brutalities of civil war and famine, peasants, urban workers and many soldiers demanded the creation of a more democratic socialist government. The Politburo were unwilling to compromise, maintaining a one-party state and demanding total discipline and unity within the party. Economically, however, direct methods of mobilisation were abandoned, allowing a revival of private trade on a small scale. These changes paved the way for the NEP, which in turn led to an increase in agricultural and industrial production. Critics of the NEP complained that flourishing markets in agricultural produce benefited a revived class of rural entrepreneurs as opposed to the urban proletariat. They insisted that the government find the resources to invest in industrial growth t o counter this trend. Unable to secure these resources, the government became increasingly unpopular amongst the peasantry, who still made up over 80 per cent of the population. Following Lenin’s death and Stalin’s consolidation of power, the government dealt with this crisis by experimenting with the direct, coercive mobilisation of resources from the countryside. This collectivisation marked the end of market relations in the countryside, meaning the government could determine what happened to rural produce and where the profits were invested. By 1934 the government had successfully taken control of the huge human and material resources of the countryside. The collectivisation of these resources were subsequently diverted to the towns in Stalin’s intense programme of industrialisation. Only a hugely powerful centralised state was capable of such a programme, and it is no accident that it was managed by a highly coercive and autocratic state system. Building on a long tradition of Russian autocracy, Stalin created a modernised autocracy in which his authority grew to the point where he no longer depended on the party, but established a unique system of personal rule. The atmosphere of crisis created by collectivisation and party purges generated a crucible of paranoia which strengthened the leadership by making any form of opposition look like treachery. However, despite this severity, the Communist government enjoyed much popular support, and many ordinary citizens accepted the patriotic promises of Stalinist propaganda. In conclusion, it would appear that while the ideologies on which Imperial and Soviet Russia were founded lay at opposite ends of the political spectrum, the machinery of government operated in much the same way in both cases. It is difficult to assess which form of government was more autocratic, and it would be unwise to assume that the political currents at the beginning of the period in question form a valid basis for comparison with those at the end. However, it is safe to assert that the two forms of autocracy were as intense as they were efficiently managed. There were certainly huge differences in the ultimate aims and objectives of the two forms of government. While Imperial Russia strove to secure the succession of the Romanov dynasty through maintaining the hereditary monarchy, Soviet Russia sought to achieve world revolution in pursuit of the Communist ideal. However, the similarities in the intensity of state control appear more striking than these ideological difference s. While the concentration of government dominance appeared greater under Communism, especially during the Stalinist era, the state in both cases to all intents and purposes retained almost full control over agriculture, industry, the military, education and the judiciary. In this respect, the similarities seem to be greater than the differences. It is not without a certain sense of irony that such state control was nominally approved by the electorate in Soviet Russia, in spite of the hardships it often caused. Bibliography David Christian, Imperial Soviet Russia – Power, Privilege the Challenge of Modernity (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1997) Terence Emmons, The Russian Landed Gentry and the Peasant Emancipation of 1861 (Cambridge: CUP, 1967) J. N. Westwood, Endurance and Endeavour, Russian History 1812-1992 (London: OUP, 1973) Edward C. Thaden, Russia Since 1801: The Making of a New Society (New York: Wiley, 1971) US Library of Congress, Federal Research Division Country Studies Series (Russia), http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/cshome.html

Essay --

Merging Bharat with India (Banking the UNBANKED): Introduction India is very well positioned for a new era of growth. It has a young demography, an abundance of entrepreneurial vigour, a highly competitive and agile services sector, significant potential in burgeoning industries and massive untapped consumer demand in its rural populations. The banking industry has also shown tremendous growth in volume and complexity since the advent of 1991 reforms in India. Despite making significant improvements in all the areas relating to financial and economical viability, profitability, governance and competitiveness, there are concerns that banks have not been able to reach and bring vast chunk of the population, especially the people touted to be at the â€Å"bottom of the pyramid† into the fold of basic banking services. This brings us to the much discussed and deliberated topic of financial inclusion. What exactly is Financial Inclusion? Dr K C Chakrabarty, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India defines Financial Inclusion in these words, â€Å"Financial Inclusion is the process of ensuring access to appropriate financial products and services needed by all sections of the society at an affordable cost in a fair and transparent manner by mainstream institutional players.† Current Scenario As we have moved forward on the path of reforms, we have moved away from the main objective i.e - social equity. The focus on the aam aadmi is extremely important in our country as he is usually the neglected one. Even after 20 years of banking sector privatisation, today only 35% of the Indian population has formal bank accounts compared to an average of 41% in developing economies. In a country where nearly 70% of the population lives in villages, the numb... ... to be tempered because the financial system can grow only as fast as the rest of our economy. With the present India’s income levels, it is neither doing much worse nor much better than its peers as far as key parameters of financial inclusion are taken into consideration. A cross-country survey done by the World Bank shows that 7% of Indians reported taking a loan from a financial institution in the past year and 11% reported saving at a formal financial institution. These figures were found to be similar to the average of lower middle-income range countries. The percentage of persons taking formal financial loans is roughly the same across the developing countries. The journey could be long and arduous but we have embarked in the right direction. The road will finally lead to a place where Bharat WILL merge and there will be one entity, one nation, one INDIA.

Basic Tooth Anatomy

Teeth are shaped according to its function and location in the mouth but regardless of its shape and function, it is composed of the same structures as follows: Crown- is the top portion of the tooth. This is what we can see in the oral cavity just by looking inside our patients’ mouth. Root- is the part of the tooth that is embedded in the bone. We can see the root of a tooth usually in a radiograph. Each tooth is composed of 4 primary structures namely: Enamel- is the hardest and most mineralized substance in the body. It covers the outside of the crown of the tooth and is translucent. Because the content of enamel is highly mineralized it also makes it susceptible to cavities. How? Reasons for decay vary but mostly it is due to ingestion of sugars that react with the bacteria found in the mouth that forms a type of acid that attacks enamel therefore it weakens enamel and overtime causes cavities. Dentin- makes up the bulk of the tooth and lies under enamel. It covers the pulp and the color may range from gray to yellow usually penetrating through the enamel. Dentin is composed of mineralized connective tissue like enamel but it is softer. It is necessary for the support of enamel. It also serves as a cushion to protect enamel from breaking. Pulp- is found at the center of the tooth. It is composed of nerves and blood vessels that provide nutrients to the tooth. And since it is made up of these structures, the pulp is soft and vulnerable without the protection of enamel and dentin. At the tip of the pulp we can find what is called as the â€Å"apex† of the root, this is a small opening where blood vessels and nerves pass through. Cementum- is a bone like connective tissue located around the root. It helps support the teeth by providing a place of attachment to the other tissues that surround the teeth in the socket.

Essay about Task 2

Essay about Task 2 Essay about Task 2 TaLonne Gungle LWT1 Task 2 The secondary school in which I will be using for my program is a rural school in central West Virginia. The school district includes the entire county. The percentage of Caucasians is 98.4% with all other races at 0.2% or lower, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). The residents have a low socioeconomic status. According to the West Virginia Department of Education (2014), 58.43% of students are considered economically disadvantaged. The median household income is $29,282 with 22.4% living at or below the poverty level (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). The most recent unemployment data shows that this county has an unemployment rate of 11.5% (West Virginia Research, Information and Analysis Division, 2014). According to the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (Reed, 2014), this county has the lowest percentage of high school seniors attending an institution of higher learning at 36.5%. Procedures to Assess Workforce Engagement The administration of this educational institution evaluates workforce engagement by conducting an annual review of all teachers using the state adopted educator evaluation system. Teachers are divided into different progressions based on their years of experience. Advanced progression teachers have taught for six or more years, intermediate progression teachers have taught for four-five years, and initial progression teachers have taught three years or less. The evaluation system includes a self-reflection, observations, student learning goals, and school-wide growth in reading and mathematics. The self-reflection and final annual review are the same rubric. The teacher places themselves in whichever category they feel they belong based on the rubric. The administration conducts observations throughout the year in order to compile data to complete the annual review rubric. The teacher is also required to create two student learning goals, collect data, and evaluate the performance. The school-wide growth in reading and mathematics is based on student test scores on the state standardized test, and the growth is measured by the state department of education. Results Promote High Performance Based on their performance, teachers earn a performance level of distinguished, accomplished, emerging, or unsatisfactory. Teachers who earn an unsatisfactory rating are required to complete a corrective action plan that addresses their deficits. The educator evaluator system is successful in that teachers know what performance level they have earned, and can make corrections to be better teachers. This system also requires teachers that score unsatisfactory to focus on their deficits and correct them. If these deficits are not corrected, the teacher is terminated. This requires all teachers be successful and continuously meet the requirements set forth by state code. Process Improvement The administration meets with each teacher after their observation has been complete. The administration tells the teacher which performance level they have been assigned, but do not explain why. This part of the educator evaluation system could be improved by the administration completing the required rubrics and then explaining why the teacher has been assigned that performance level. Without an explanation and more substantial conversation about the observation, the teacher is unable to make corrections or improve parts of their instruction. If the teacher were provided with this information, the teacher could make the necessary improvements to be a better teacher. Labor Association Collaboration The school organization’s leadership team does not effectively collaborate with the labor association representatives. The leadership team does not meet with the labor association representative unless a major issue that affects most staff arises; small issues are not addressed through the labor representative. Several teachers were asked to use their planning periods to cover