TORONTO (Reuters) - Coaches at the 2012 Olympic Games in London have harnessed a new set of tools to land a coveted spot on the podium -- mobile apps.

Gymnastics, diving and swimming coaches are using apps to analyze form, execution and timing to improve performance.

John Geddert, head coach of the U.S. women's gymnastics team and personal coach of Olympian Jordyn Wieber, likes SwingReader and Coach's Eye, apps available for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch, to record gymnasts' routines and play them back in slow motion, frame-by-frame.

"You can see form and execution errors, legs apart or knees bent," explained Geddert, adding that the apps helped him diagnose why a gymnast at the Olympics was not being credited for an element in a routine and make immediate adjustments.

The U.S. swim team uses an underwater camera to take video footage which is reviewed poolside in slow motion with an app called VideoPix, available for iPhone and iPod Touch.

National performance advisor Russell Mark said it helps the swimmers master aspects of their technique such as their starts and turns.

Aaron Dziver, one of the coaches behind Canadian synchronized diving bronze medalists Meaghan Benfeito and Roseline Filion, is also a fan of VideoPix.

"We can look at the actual technique we're trying to modify in the diver and very quickly show them what they're doing and have them try to focus on a corrected execution," he said.

The coaches also use apps to superimpose different dives on top of each other to compare differences in execution.

"Every single country uses an iPad on deck and captures the dive as soon as they do it," explained Drew Johansen, head coach of the US diving team.

View original post here:
Olympic coaches fine-tune performance with mobile apps

Lolo Jones attempted to console Jamaica's Brigitte Foster-Hylton following her fall in the 100-meter hurdles preliminary heat.

Stu Forster/Getty Images

LONDON -- The heartbreak was written all over Lolo Jones' face, except it wasn't her dreams that were shattered this time. In the sixth preliminary heat of the women's 100-meter hurdles, it was Jamaica's Brigitte Foster-Hylton, a former World Champion, who tripped over a hurdle and saw her last shot at a medal slip away. At age 37, Foster-Hylton was running in her fourth, and likely last, Olympic Games.

At the finish line, Jones quickly rushed over to Foster-Hylton and tried to put an arm around her. But Jones knew very well there was nothing she could do or say to ease the pain. Four years ago, she clipped the ninth hurdle in the final and dropped from first to seventh place because her lead leg came over a barrier a fraction of an inch too low.

Monday morning at the Olympic Stadium in East London, everyone was reminded once again just how cruel the 100-meter hurdles can be. It can cut a world champion down in less than 13 seconds flat, rendering four years of work into a puddle of tears. Few know the feeling as intimately as Jones.

"My heart breaks for Brigitte," Jones said moments after she qualified for Tuesday night's semifinal with her season-best time of 12.68 seconds. "I'm just devastated for her because she's been so dominant, and for her not to have an Olympic medal, I'm devastated for her.... I tried [to console her], but honestly, the emotions were outpouring from her. If she would've punched me, I totally would understand because... we work so hard for this."

Her voice cracked and tears appeared to well in her eyes, as if she was reliving her Beijing blunder all over again. In 2008, her misstep garnered a mountain of coverage, particularly because she had been the gold-medal favorite heading into Beijing. She handled the utter disappointment with grace, speaking with reporters and seeing out her responsibilities before convulsing with tears inside the Bird's Nest. It's a race that continues to haunt her -- and not just on the track.

The attention she received that night in Beijing, and in the subsequent years since, has become the hot topic of the moment. Jones is not the favorite to win gold in London on Tuesday night, but she has received more media coverage and marketing opportunities than Australia's Sally Pearson, the 2011 world champion who led qualifiers after running 12.57 seconds, or U.S. teammate Dawn Harper, the reigning Olympic champion. In part because of her physical beauty and her relative openness about her personal life and struggles, Jones has become a popular and accessible subject for news outlets -- both sporting and otherwise. But now, that openness has bred backlash.

A New York Times story published last week suggested that Jones was actively capitalizing on her misfortunes for attention. "Essentially, Jones has decided she will be whatever anyone wants her to be -- vixen, virgin, victim -- to draw attention to herself and the many products she endorses," the story read.

The Times suggested her image far outsized her performance, comparing her to former Russian tennis player Anna Kournikova, who once ranked in the Top 20 but gained most of her fame for a pretty face despite having never won a WTA title. But while Jones may not be a favorite tomorrow night, that's not to say she never was. She hasn't won an Olympic medal, but she is a two-time Indoor World Champion in the 60-meter hurdles and has run the 100-meter distance as fast as 12.43, when she cruised through the semifinal in 2008. Only Pearson has run a faster time since. And though Jones' performances this season have been relatively meager, they should also be taken in the context of a recent hamstring injury and an August 2011 spinal cord surgery that left her essentially bed-ridden for weeks.

Visit link:
Sarah Kwak: Lolo Jones' openness with personal life has bred unfair backlash

NEW YORK, Aug. 6, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Reportlinker.com announces that a new market research report is available in its catalogue:

Personal Protective Equipment in the U.S.

http://www.reportlinker.com/p0944030/Personal-Protective-Equipment-in-the-US.html#utm_source=prnewswire&utm_medium=pr&utm_campaign=Chemical_and_Material

SBI estimates the U.S. market for personal protective equipment (PPE) will top $13 billion in 2012. As the economy begins to heat up, U.S. PPE sales should exceed $14.1 billion in 2013, which represents an 8.2 percent increase over the 2012 figure. The strengthening global economy should increase the growth rate in 2015 with PPE sales in the U.S. anticipated to hit $16.7 billion.

The Personal Protective Equipment sector is comprised of a group of products that are designed to protect users from occupational hazards, injuries and illnesses. Categories covered include:

Body Protection and Protective Clothing

Hand and Foot Protection

Head and Face Protection

Respiratory Protection

See the original post:
Personal Protective Equipment in the U.S.

Consumers who have become accustomed to the customer-focused practices adopted by hotels, banks and retailers increasingly are judging physicians by those standards, according to consulting firm PwC.

The firm examined consumer opinions of health care customer service and compared it with other industries, using data from the firms 2012 Experience Radar survey. PwC surveyed 6,000 U.S. consumers online between May and July 2011.

PwC advises physicians and hospitals to try to win over customers with convenient, personalized, warm service not only because it makes patients happy, but also because pay is at stake. Medicare and other payers now include patient satisfaction scores in pay-for-performance programs, and some insurers global payment contracts include bonus pay that is dependent not only on clinical quality scores, but also on how patients rate their experiences.

Physicians skeptical of tying pay to satisfaction scores have argued that what consumers want is not always what is best for patients. Doctors say basing pay on the happiness of patients creates incentives to do things like overprescribe antibiotics or run unnecessary diagnostic tests that patients demand.

Only 8% of patients rank price as the top factor in choosing a doctor or hospital.

But Mark Friedberg, MD, a Boston-based internist and researcher at RAND Corp., rejects that argument. There is no reason physicians cant deliver the best care while also trying to give patients the best possible experiences, he said.

I dont think its unreasonable to ask clinicians to meet multiple goals, he said. It is possible for highly trained professionals to be excellent in all respects.

Even when it isnt tied to pay rates, customer satisfaction plays a huge role in attracting and retaining patients at a physicians office or a hospital even more so than price, which is the top consideration for customers in other businesses. PwC found that only 8% of consumers ranked price as the top factor in choosing a doctor or hospital, compared to 50% for health insurance, 55% for retail business, and 69% for personal travel.

Satisfied patients also spur additional business, to a greater degree than happy customers do for hotels, airlines or other vendors. The PwC survey showed that personal recommendations were 2.6 times more likely to influence a purchase in health care than in other industries. Nine out of 10 patients were willing to recommend a physician or hospital after a positive experience. Multiple studies by other researchers have found that online physician reviews most often are positive.

However, the PwC research also showed that an unsatisfactory experience what the firm refers to as a negative moment of truth is harder to reconcile in health care than it is in other industries. An apology and acknowledgement of a mistake or problem would be more likely to pacify customers who were angry about a bad hotel stay or purchase than a patient upset about a bad experience with a hospital or physician.

Read this article:
Satisfaction scores seen as crucial to physician success

More than 30 million U.S. viewers have been tuning in to the London Olympics each day, and many more are catching Gabby Douglas and Ryan Lochte online. If you've been paying close attention to the winners' facial expressions, body language, and comments, it's possible you've noticed an odd phenomenon: The bronze-medal winners may seem happier with their achievements than those who grabbed the silver.

At least that was the conclusion of a 1995 academic paper by Victoria Husted Medvec, Scott Madey, and Thomas Gilovich, which was the subject of a a recent report on NPR. The study's authors examined the facial expressions of Olympic medal winners on the podium during the 1992 competition in Barcelona. Even after controlling for other factors, their hypothesis held up: Bronze medal winners seemed more content with their prizes than those who took home the silver.

The researchers chalked up these findings to a phenomenon that social scientists call framing--the tendency to respond to events based on our own experiences and cultures. The silver medal winners framed their performance relative to the gold medal winners, and berated themselves for not being able to emerge victorious even though doing so was close at hand. The bronze-medal winners, meanwhile, didn't judge their success alongside the gold and silver winners, but relative to the many athletes who will leave the games without winning any medals at all.

The concept of framing has been an important one in the realm of money and finance, too. In one famous study by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, shoppers said they would drive 20 minutes to save $5 on a $15 calculator, but wouldn't drive the same distance to save $5 on a $125 calculator. The savings were the same in both instances, the frames were not.

The Olympics study, meanwhile, has particularly rich implications for how investors view their own performance. By framing our success or failure relative to the wrong yardstick, we risk not only making ourselves miserable, but undermining our financial well-being at the same time. Here are some ways to ensure that you're using the right frame of reference when evaluating how you're doing.

MYOBThe obvious takeaway from the Olympics study is one we probably all got from our parents at an early age: mind your own business. Just as mentally healthy athletes know that the real gauge of success is how well they've delivered on their own expectations for themselves, the true measure of your investing performance is whether you're getting closer to your goals as the years go by, not whether you're beating Warren Buffett or your boastful brother-in-law. Yet it's easy to see how so many investors fall into the silver-medal trap: They start buying stocks and funds without stopping to think what will constitute personal success or attempting to quantify what they'll actually need for financial goals such as retirement.

Online tools such as T. Rowe Price's Retirement Income Calculator and Morningstar's Asset Allocator can provide a rough gauge of whether your current investments and asset allocation, combined with your planned future contributions, put you on track to reach your goals on an inflation-adjusted basis. Revisiting your progress toward your goal should be the linchpin of any portfolio checkup, as I discussed in this midyear checkup presentation, and can help you stay focused on what factors you actually control.

Be Honest About Your AbilitiesEven though your progress toward your financial goals should be the main measure of how well you're doing, that doesn't mean you shouldn't keep track of how good your investment choices have been. Are you adding value relative to an inexpensive, plain-vanilla benchmark or subtracting it?

To find out, I advise creating a custom benchmark that matches your own portfolio's asset allocation, saving it in our Portfolio Manager tool, and using it to gauge your investment-selection acumen on an ongoing basis. I discussed the specifics of setting up such a benchmark in this article (http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=357708). If your stocks and funds underperform a benchmark consisting of simple, inexpensive index funds over time, it's wise to ask yourself whether you might not better off investing in such a cheap, low-maintenance index fund or exchange-traded fund portfolio instead.

Don't Get Hung Up on 'The Best'Finally, too many investors, like the dour-looking Silver medal-winning Olympians, have an unhealthy preoccupation with "the best"--they want to buy the best stocks at the lowest possible prices, and they want their funds to be at the top of the heap at any given point in time. That's a misplaced effort and one that will almost certainly lead to misery and too much trading. Rather than obsessing over obtaining the lowest possible price for a stock or engaging in the impossible task of finding a fund that will always be on top, your best bet is to stack the deck in your favor by keeping your asset allocation sensible and practicing smart portfolio-management techniques like dollar-cost averaging and rebalancing. Those strategies all but guarantee your performance won't be "the best," but they also greatly improve the odds that it will be far better than average, as I discussed in this article (http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=396889).

See the article here:
Your Investment Performance and the Silver Medal Trap

by Dan Bickley - Aug. 5, 2012 04:19 PM The Republic | azcentral.com

WIMBLEDON, England -- The old scouting report on Great Britain was simple: Put its athletes on a bike or in a boat, and they're dangerous. They have a knack for sports that require sitting down.

But give them Olympic home-field advantage, and it's bloody hell.

Andy Murray became the latest toast of London, demolishing the great Roger Federer on Sunday with shocking ease (6-2, 6-1, 6-4) in the men's tennis final. The triumph carried great personal significance.

It marked the long-awaited breakthrough for Murray, who is 0 for 4 in grand slam finals. It atoned for his loss to Federer on Centre Court just four weeks ago, where Murray's tearful concession speech turned him into a sympathetic figure.

How often does one get a second chance so quickly?

But there is a much bigger story in play. Murray's triumph came less than 24 hours after Great Britain's greatest day ever in the Olympics. Three track stars won gold medals, turning a Saturday evening into a massive Brit party, a night when BBC commentators gushed like unabashed homers.

Pubs were crammed. In one of them, a viewer was transfixed with the medal count on the screen, beaming with national pride that Great Britain was actually in third place, behind China and the U.S.

That energy was the story at Wimbledon, where Federer seemed to wilt under its force, where the Brits couldn't believe what they were seeing.

"I watched the athletics last night, and it was unbelievable ... it gave me a boost coming into today," Murray said. "The momentum the team's had the last couple of days has been good."

Originally posted here:
London's local success in Olympics raises question: When does U.S. want back in?

By mark cabaniss - August 6, 2012 | Tickers: AMZN, EBAY, MCD, SBUX | 0 Comments

mark is a member of The Motley Fool Blog Network -- entries represent the personal opinions of our bloggers and are not formally edited.

It happens to all great companies. They win. The burger wars, the shoeshine wars, the detergent wars -- at some point, a company clearly emerges as the leader, and its competitors as also-rans. And then, what? What is left after victory? For some, such as McDonald's, (NYSE: MCD) there is no acknowledgement of "victory," but only a single-minded focus on sustaining and improving profitability, as though the company was still number two, forever trying harder. McDonald's expands their menu only slowly, and after extensive test-marketing. When they see an opportunity for easy profits, they move in, as with their McCafe line of coffee beverages. After Starbucks (NASDAQ: SBUX) did the heavy lifting of popularizing lattes and cappucinos, McDonald's piggybacked on their success, simultaneously making a nice profit while undercutting a competitor. But McDonald's still doesn't sell pizza, or tacos. No, they are a burger chain, number one, and very focused on staying there. For others, victory means it is time to move on to new endeavors. They branch out, buying or building new businesses. They diversify, (or lose focus, depending on your point of view.)

The sixties was the high water mark of the conglomerate. Companies bought other companies, oftentimes, lots of them. It didn't matter if they were in the same industry. The idea was to leverage borrowing costs and management -- if a management team could run a tire company, why, they surely could also run a movie theater chain, and a smoked clam cannery, and maybe a map or telescope company, right? Well no; often wrong, actually. Gulf+Western used to own the Miss Universe beauty pageant, the Associates finance company, and the Desilu TV production company, as well as mattress, cigar, sugar, record, publishing, and auto parts businesses, among others. Oh, and also Madison Square Garden, and with it the New York Knicks and the New York Rangers. Today, Gulf+Western is gone, having disappeared piece by piece, as it sold itself off in an ongoing, decades-long attempt to slim down and focus. With just a few exceptions, such as Leucadia National, Loews Corporation and, most notably, Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway, conglomerates such as Gulf+Western are mostly gone, having been dismantled in the 80s, as companies have sold off sideline businesses, and focused on improving core competencies.

Which brings us to Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN). What exactly does Amazon do? Is Amazon losing it's focus? Where are they going? They are the World's number one online retailer, but they are rapidly morphing out of or outgrowing or leaving that business and going into the packing and shipping business as a fulfillment agent for other online merchants. Last quarter their third party shipments increased to 40% of total units shipped from 36% the prior quarter. That is a huge shift. Amazon bulls are, for whatever reason, mostly applauding this move. But if that trend keeps up, and Amazon's units shipped become 50%, 70%, 90% third party, they will cease to be a retailer, becoming something between eBay and UPSa combination internet selling platform and third-party warehouser, packer, and shipper. Is this a good idea? Who knows?

I find it puzzling that Amazon gets credit for displacing bricks-and-mortar retailers even as it transforms itself into a bricks-and-mortar warehouser.This year, Amazon has opened six new fulfillment centers, that is, giant bricks-and-mortar operations, with twelve more in the works. Will these prove a smart investment, or money-hemorraging Taj Mahals tied like millstones around the neck of Amazon's earnings statements? I don't know, and I'm not sure that anyone else does, either.

Amazon is also, for now, a cloud services company, and a portable computer company, with the Kindle Fire. What do these businesses have to do with each other? Yes, I know that people can buy Amazon's online product offerings via their Kindles, but they can also shop Amazon from their laptops and desktops, and smartphones, a business which, incidentally, Amazon is talking about getting into, to further compete with Apple. Question: if it is a good idea for Amazon to start making telephones, why would it not also be a good idea for them to start making computers, and go into business against Dell?

I cannot help but admire Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos. He is an example of the ideal self-made man. He could take his billions and retire into a life of consumeristic hedonism, jetting around the globe drinking champagne, collecting houses and art. Instead, he chooses to keep working as hard as ever, in the great American tradition of Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, and Steve Jobs. However, I think Amazon may have fallen into the trap of trying to maintain it's growth rate by getting into new ventures. Some say that a company is like a shark -- it has to keep moving or it dies. But there is an obvious danger in growth for growth's sake. If you just move move move, too quickly, you may find that you have moved into a blind alley, and have committed huge amounts of time and money to vast and unprofitable ventures. You may find yourself like some sixties conglomerate, trying to focus on your core competency and shed businesses that only a few years before sounded like such good ideas.

Whither Amazon? They are moving, 'tis true, but where?

My brother once said "All of my problems are first-world problems." My investing credo: money, while nice, is ultimately only money.

See more here:
Is Success Killing Amazon?

Joining the Greek community means "opportunities for leadership development, service, brotherhood, academic achievement, networking and social engagement," "a home away from home" and "an opportunity to belong to one of the world's largest lifelong, personal development organizations," according to the North-American Interfraternity Conference, a trade association representing 5,500 men's fraternities at more than 800 U.S. college campuses.

In the 2010-2011 school year, the most recent year for which data are available, more than 300,000 men belonged to undergraduate fraternities, gave 2.25 million hours of community service and raised $14.6 million for charity. The National Pan-Hellenic Conference, which represents 2,986 women's fraternity and sorority chapters on 655 campuses, says women's fraternities provide value beyond the college years, by helping individuals develop their potential "through leadership opportunities and group effort." While you may not be able to put a price on benefits like these, you can put a price on the many expenses associated with membership.

SEE: What You Need To Do Before Applying To College Room and BoardThe room and board expenses associated with belonging to a sorority or fraternity vary by school and chapter. At the University of North Carolina (UNC), for example, the average cost for a fraternity member's room, board and dues is $2,970 per semester but ranges from $1,600 to $5,000. For sorority members, the average cost is $2,987 per semester and the range is $2,575 to $3,407. Living in a Greek house is not necessarily more expensive than living in student housing and buying a university meal plan. For example, in Westwood, the upscale Los Angeles neighborhood where UCLA resides, Greek housing can actually save students money. The costs for both seem to be steadily rising as well, but there are ways to combat rising college costs .

New Member Dues and Active Member DuesAt UNC, new members pay $600-$900 in new member dues in the semester when they join. Thereafter, the average cost is $200 to $300 per semester. Dues consist of chapter dues, national dues and pan-hellenic dues. This money helps cover expenses, such as liability insurance, house upkeep, scholarships and social events. Some chapters have payment plans that help members meet their dues obligations.

SEE: Student Borrowing: University Payment Plan Vs. Federal Student Loans FinesSome chapters impose fines on individual members for breaking rules. You might have to pay up if you miss a mandatory meeting or activity, or don't meet GPA standards. Recruitment infractions can also result in fines, which might cost $50 per violation. Members may also be fined for not doing assigned housework or for drinking alcohol at events where alcohol consumption is not allowed. Some chapters allow these fines to be paid in service hours. Also, Greek houses can face fines for fire code violations, trash violations and failure to submit required paperwork on time. In a worst-case scenario, a house could face expensive police fines for violations of city laws, such as serving alcohols to minors and exceeding house occupancy limits during parties.

Social Expenses Expenses associated with social activities can be difficult to estimate before joining a sorority or fraternity. They can vary significantly by chapter but they're also the expense you technically have the most control over. However, just because it isn't mandatory to donate to every charity event and buy a new dress for every dance and a new t-shirt for every function, doesn't mean you won't feel like these expenses are required when you're overtly or subtly pressured into them. Social expenses can add hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to the cost of "going Greek."

You might be expected to spend money on clothes with your chapter's colors and letters, gifts for your brothers or sisters, event tickets, outings to restaurants and bars, limousine rentals for formal nights out and professional event photos. In some chapters, you could face pressure to buy designer clothes and accessories to maintain the group's self-styled image.

SEE: Pay For College Without Selling A Kidney Alumni ExpensesStudents who take to heart the lifelong membership component of the Greek system will find themselves with sorority- and fraternity-related expenses long after they graduate. "Adults spend an astronomical amount of money as members of alumni chapters of fraternal organizations, especially in the African-American community," says Crystal L. Kendrick, president of Cincinnati marketing firm The Voice of Your Customer.

"Many professionals join alumni chapters at costs that could easily reach $1,000," she says. In addition to joining fees, there are event fees. Regional and national sorority conventions that give graduates an opportunity to meet members of all ages of their chapters from other colleges, but it costs money to travel to and participate in these events. Kendrick adds that supporting various fundraising efforts throughout the year and purchasing expensive paraphernalia can further add to alumni expenses.

Career AdvantagesFraternity and sorority members are more likely to graduate and, as a group, have slightly higher GPAs than their non-Greek peers. Beyond graduation, if you nurture the social connections you'll develop as a member of the Greek system, you can have access to a lifelong network that can help you get a job and advance in your career. Numerous politicians, Fortune 500 executives, Supreme Court justices and American presidents belonged to fraternities or sororities.

Original post:
Should You Join A Sorority Or Fraternity?

PHOENIX, Aug. 6, 2012 /PRNewswire/ --Grand Canyon Education, Inc. (LOPE), a regionally accredited provider of online and campus-based postsecondary education services, today announced financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

For the three months ended June 30, 2012:

For the six months ended June 30, 2012:

Balance Sheet and Cash Flow

As of June 30, 2012, the University had unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of $50.8 million compared to $21.2 million at December 31, 2011 and restricted cash and cash equivalents at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 of $54.9 million and $56.7 million, respectively.

The University generated $79.6 million in cash from operating activities for the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $37.6 million for the same period in 2011. Cash provided by operating activities in 2012 and 2011 resulted from our net income plus non-cash charges for provision for bad debts, depreciation and amortization, share-based compensation and improvement in our working capital.

Net cash used in investing activities was $50.3million and $32.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Capital expenditures were $50.5million and $38.3million for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. In 2012, capital expenditures primarily consisted of the construction costs associated with two additional dormitories, an Arts and Science classroom building and a parking garage to support our increasing traditional student enrollment as well as purchases of computer equipment, other internal use software projects and furniture and equipment. In 2011, capital expenditures primarily consisted of ground campus building projects such as a new dormitory and an events arena to support our increasing traditional ground student enrollment as well as purchases of computer equipment, internal use software projects and furniture and equipment. In 2011 expenditures were partially offset by a $5.4 million decrease in restricted cash as a result of payment of the qui tam legal matter in June 2011.

Net cash provided by financing activities was $0.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and net cash used in financing activities was $23.7 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011. During the first six months of 2012 $3.4 million of proceeds from the exercise of stock options were partially offset by $2.0 million used to purchase treasury stock in accordance with the University's share repurchase program and principal payments on notes payable and capital lease obligations of $1.3 million. During the first six months of 2011, $22.4 million was used to purchase treasury stock in accordance with the University's share repurchase program and principal payments on notes payable and capital leases totaled $1.9 million, partially offset by $0.6 million of proceeds from the exercise of stock options.

2012 Annual Outlook by Quarter

Q3 2012:

Continued here:
Grand Canyon Education, Inc. Reports Second Quarter 2012 Results

By TERENCE CHEA Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - When the Massachusetts Institute of Technology offered its first free online course this spring, Ashwith Rego jumped at the chance to learn from some of the world's leading researchers - without leaving his home in India.

"I never imagined that I would be taught by professors from MIT, let alone for free," said the 24-year-old engineer who works in Bangalore.

From Harvard to Stanford, a growing number of elite universities are throwing open their digital doors to the masses. They're offering their most popular courses online for no charge, allowing anyone with an Internet connection to learn from world-renowned scholars and scientists.

Many colleges have offered Web-based courses for years, but the participation of top-tier research universities marks a major milestone in the expansion of digital learning.

The proliferation of so-called massive open online courses, or MOOCs, has the potential to transform higher education at a time when colleges and universities are grappling with shrinking budgets, rising costs and protests over soaring tuition and student debt.

Supporters say these online courses can lower teaching costs, improve learning online and on campus, and significantly expand access to higher education, which could fuel technological innovation and economic growth.

"It holds the potential for serving many, many hundreds of thousands of students in a way we simply cannot today," said Molly Corbett Broad, president of the American Council on Education.

Last month, a dozen major research universities announced they would begin offering courses on the online learning platform Coursera, joining Stanford and Princeton universities and the universities of Pennsylvania and Virginia.

The University of California, Berkeley said it would start making online courses available this fall through edX, a competing Web portal launched in May by Harvard University and MIT with $60 million in funding from the two schools.

Excerpt from:
Hometownstations.com-WLIO- Lima, OH News Weather SportsElite colleges transform online higher education