Datasets:
Recag
/
C4_40

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
Community
text
stringlengths
10
78.4k
Stanley Black & Decker's current dividend yield of 1.7% isn't all that high. But the company boasts a 49-year track record of dividend increases each and every year, including its most recent boost of more than 5%. Going forward, the need for basic tools should keep Stanley Black & Decker moving higher even in challenging economic environments.
ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM) needs no introduction. The oil giant is a powerhouse in the global energy industry, and its integrated oil and natural gas business is the benchmark against which smaller oil companies measure themselves. With a history that goes back to Standard Oil, ExxonMobil and its predecessors have paid dividends since 1882.
ExxonMobil has a healthy dividend yield of 3.8%, and it also has a history of annual dividend increase that goes back 35 years. As long as you keep gassing up your car or heating your home, demand for ExxonMobil's products will continue, and that should help power dividend raises for years to come.
Eli Lilly (NYSE:LLY) makes medications that millions of people need to get and stay healthy. Lilly has a huge stable of lucrative prescription drugs to drive sales and profits, with products like antidepressant Cymbalta and schizophrenia and bipolar disorder treatment Zyprexa leading the way. The company has passed that success on to its shareholders by paying a dividend since 1885.
Lilly's dividend yield of 2.5% is solid, but the company doesn't have a long streak of annual dividend increases. After more than 40 years of consecutive boosts, Lilly kept its dividend flat in the aftermath of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. For now, Lilly has focused on making the most of its drug opportunities, and investors are sharing the bounty.
Utilities are traditionally great dividend stocks, and Consolidated Edison (NYSE:ED) has been especially strong. As the primary regulated utility for New York City and the surrounding area, the company serves about 3.4 million electric customers and 1.1 million natural-gas customers in the city and in Westchester County, with additional customers in outlying areas. The utility has paid dividends since 1885.
Consolidated Edison's current dividend yield is 3.5%, which is well above the market's average, and the company also boasts a 43-year streak of consecutive dividend increases. Boring businesses can be beautiful for shareholders, and Consolidated Edison shows that the right combination of fundamental strength and regular income can make for an invaluable addition to your portfolio.
Along the same lines, UGI (NYSE:UGI) is a distributor of electricity, natural gas, and propane. The company doesn't have the brand awareness of Consolidated Edison, but it serves nearly 2 million residential and commercial propane customers throughout the 50 states. Its distribution network and retail sales services help customers directly, while its electricity generation facilities supply power well beyond its home market of Pennsylvania. The company's dividend history started in 1885.
UGI's current dividend yield is 2%, but it has a 30-year track record of boosting its payments every year. Moreover, the company has ample earnings to finance its dividends, which gives it plenty of room for potential increases down the road.
Procter & Gamble (NYSE:PG) is a household name around the world, with roughly two dozen different brands producing at least $1 billion in sales annually. From Tide detergent to Pampers diapers and Crest toothpaste, you can find Procter & Gamble products in nearly every medicine cabinet and laundry room in the U.S., as well as in many countries across the globe. The company has paid its shareholders dividends since 1891.
Procter & Gamble pays a 3.2% dividend yield, and its streak of regular payout increases is one of the longest in the stock market at 61 years and counting. The Dow Jones component's market exposure is unparalleled, and as developing economies gain purchasing power, they should help boost P&G's growth in the long run.
Coca-Cola (NYSE:KO) is an American icon whose simple soft drinks have turned into a consumer-products monolith. Even as the company has had to deal with threats to its dominance, including restrictions and taxes on sugary soft drinks, Coca-Cola has managed to weather these worldwide trends and come out with new products to make up lost ground. Coca-Cola's dividend record stretches back to 1893.
Coca-Cola boasts a 3.5% dividend yield and a 55-year track record of annual dividend increases. Some investors fear for the future of its business, but Coca-Cola has changed gears enough times in its history that it should be able to overcome its current challenges and maintain its dominance over the beverage market.
Like Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE:CL) has ridden the global rise of the consumer class by selling everyday people the everyday products they need. Its many brands of household consumables, like Colgate toothpaste and Palmolive dish detergent, have achieved near-ubiquity -- and raked in huge profits. The company has been generous in sharing those profits with others, having paid dividends since 1895.
Colgate-Palmolive's stock yields just 2.2%, but it has a 54-year dividend streak. If its emerging-market sales continue to accelerate, then Colgate-Palmolive should be in an ideal position to keep making shareholders richer.
Clock tower in York, Pennsylvania. Image source: Getty Images.
Few investors have heard of York Water (NASDAQ:YORW), but the water utility specialist serves its customers in Pennsylvania with high-quality water and wastewater services. York serves a wide variety of different types of residential and commercial customers, helping to spur greater industrial activity. Its history of dividend payments goes back more than 200 years.
Right now, York Water yields just 1.7%. But the company has increased its payout for 20 straight years, and some investors believe future consolidation in the water utility business could help York Water find partners and grow even bigger and more financially healthy. People will always need water, and this utility has what it takes to succeed.
Strong stocks with lucrative dividends are valuable, and the best dividend stocks keep paying dividends through thick and thin. For investors who appreciate a good track record, these stocks are worth a closer look for your dividend portfolio.
The Bermuda Underwater Exploration Institute [BUEI] is getting set to screen two films, Viceroy’s House on Sunday, December 10 at 5.15pm and Wonderstruck on Sunday, December 17 at 7.00pm in the Tradewinds Theatre at BUEI.
The event poster says, “New nations are rarely born in peace… India, 1947: Lord Mountbatten and his wife Edwina are transferred to New Delhi to oversee the country’s transition from British rule to independence.
“Taking his place in the resplendent mansion known as the Viceroy’s House, Mountbatten arrives hopeful for a peaceful transference of power. But ending centuries of colonial rule in a country divided by deep religious and cultural differences proves no easy undertaking.
Tickets cost $15 for adults and $10 for students, and are available by calling 294-0204 or visiting BUEI’s Oceans Gift Shop.
Ford Madox Brown's 1870 oil painting of Romeo and Juliet.
It was the end of the spring semester, a few weeks shy of summer break. My classes had just finished investigating "Romeo and Juliet." A test didn't seem appropriate or relevant, and students had done quite a bit of writing during our study of the play. I wanted a unique way to assess them.
Earlier that spring, I had attended a fantastic workshop that opened my eyes to how Shakespeare can—and should—be taught. In this workshop, I had a hands-on opportunity to experiment with the Shakespeare Set Free curriculum. In essence, if you assign Shakespeare but aren't sure how to teach his plays, you can use the SSF curricula as a solid foundation.
So I decided to have my students reinvent scene excerpts from "Romeo and Juliet"—using their creativity to interpret the play in a new setting with modern speech, costumes, and weapons. They also had to modify the language so that any 21st-century teenager could understand. Students created prompt books—master scripts—and acted out their rewritten scenes.
In this presentation, students recreate "Romeo and Juliet" as a battle between Marvel and DC comic-book characters.
As a result, the Capulets and Montagues were rebranded as jocks and nerds, competing characters from the young adult Divergent book series, Puerto Ricans and Dominicans, cowboys and Indians, futuristic moon people and humans, vampires and werewolves, and more.
It felt like the right move—both for students’ summer-distracted brains, and to create an authentic application of our genre study with the Bard.
1. Students had to select a scene from a list of options (my co-teacher and I chose the most compelling scenes) and propose the classmates with whom they wished to work. This selection process clued students in to the idea that, end of year or not, this project was deliberate and significant enough to merit careful consideration.
Rationale: Students nominated the classmates they wanted to work with, which provided instant buy-in. (I still had veto power.) Again, with summer and hormones on the mind, I figured it was best to make my battle the quality of script rather than parroting, ‘Stop talking to the other group, and work with your own!’ over and over. We also wanted to encourage the development of interpersonal collaboration and time management skills, which are essential for young adults.
2. Students then drafted a concept wherein they considered setting, costuming, and speech. They also had to summarize the original scene. With their concepts in mind, groups then had to brainstorm relevant props and sketch a set design. While we didn’t require physical backdrops given the time constraints of our unit, some groups surprised (and pleased) us by designing PowerPoint slides of backgrounds that they projected behind them as they performed.
Rationale: This project tapped into a different learning style that allowed all students to feel successful. My hammiest and most hyperactive students reveled in the unique opportunity to wear baseball hats in the classroom and shoot one another with Nerf guns, while my shiest students triumphed over their public speaking fears. It was a win-win.
This presentation squares jocks against nerds (a classic battle).
3. Next up, students had to translate their scene into modern-day speech that was appropriate for their concepts. Throughout the unit, we had paraphrased quite a bit of Elizabethan English, so this script work was a natural extension of that skill set. During this stage, students were able to use the resources we had provided when originally reading the play: a Common Shakespearean Terms glossary, a Shakespearean Compliments guide, and a key for ‘How to Talk Like Shakespeare’.
Rationale: It’s entertaining to think of ridiculous substitutions for Shakespearean names and translate Elizabethan English into a Southern drawl, slang, or alien-speak. The best student scripts were produced by close reading and re-reading. Students’ interpretations were not random; instead, they were intentional renderings of 400 year-old puns and phraseology. Both comprehension and creativity were crucial to this work.
4. Finally, students had to annotate directing notes on their scripts to demarcate the tone and stress with which they would speak, as well as the actions and movements they would make around the “stage.” We had opened our unit with several oral reading exercises to help students understand how meaning shifts when different words are stressed or different tones are used, so students were well prepared for this step.
Rationale: Not only did this annotation requirement match up with my active reading practices all year, but it ensured higher-quality performances. Furthermore, it was an act of covert close reading. Students had to read their scripts many times before settling on the best tone or most logical gesture.
In the end, this prompt-book project was tremendously rewarding for both myself and my students. When embarking upon this project, I had some reservations. I’m not a terribly performative person, myself, and I know I would have resented this assignment as a middle schooler. I also know that performances are often scoffed at as the low man on the totem pole of rigor.
But this project was no fluff. And it was fun.
I loved seeing groups of students hunched over their copies of "Romeo and Juliet," debating wording interpretations and when and where to insert a pithy "YOLO." The performances were, by and large, a riot!
Most significantly, I remembered that the best assessments are about creativity and application, not regurgitation or formulaic writing. It also doesn't hurt to be reminded now and then that getting out of one's comfort zone can lead to great things—for both students and teachers.
Sarah Goodis-Orenstein is a middle school language arts teacher and department head in a public charter school in Brooklyn. Before arriving at this school, she majored in English education at New York University, received her master's degree at Hunter College in adolescent literacy, and taught in several other middle and high schools. She is a blogger and a CTQ Collaboratory member.
"13 Ways to Celebrate Shakespeare's 450th Birthday," (BookMarks) April 24, 2014.
Our country has had a stressful week, but maybe Dustin Johnson and Paulina Gretzky are just the two people we all need right now to come together. A shining example of love and PDA, the PGA Tour's first couple took things to the next level on Friday night. No, not with a wedding, but with the release of their first music video.
Nice work, guys. Keep 'em coming.
Herreid, C.F., N.A. Schiller, K.F. Herreid, and C. Wright (2011) In Case Your Are Interested: Results of a Survey of Case Study Teachers. Journal of College Science Teachers 40 (4): 76-80.
Wolter, B.H.K., M.A.. Lundeberg, H. Kang, and C.F. Herreid (2011) Students' Perceptions of Using Personal Response Systems ("Clickers") with Cases in Science. Journal of College Science Teaching 40 (4): 14-19.
Herreid, C.F. (2010) The Scientific Method Ain't What It Used To Be. Journal of College Science Teaching 39 (6): 68-72.
Herreid, C.F. (2009) The Wisdom of Groups. Journal of College Science Teaching 38: 62-64.
Herreid, C.F. (2008) Trigger Cases versus Capstone Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching 38 (2): 68-71.
Herreid, C.F., ed. (2007) Start With a Story. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
Herreid, C.F., and K. DuRei (2007) Intimate Debate: Medicinal Use of Marijuana. Journal of College Science Teaching. 36 (4): 10-13.
Herreid, C.F. (2007) A Flock of Dodos. Journal of College Science Teaching 36(5): 12–13.
Herreid, C.F. (2007) The Boy Scouts Said It Best: Some Advice on Case-Study Teaching and Student Preparation. Journal of College Science Teaching 37(1): 6–7.
Yadav, A., M. Lundeberg, M. DeSchryver, K. Dirkin, N. Schiller, K. Maier, C.F. Herreid (2007) Teaching Science With Case Studies: A National Survey of Faculty Perceptions of the Benefits and Challenges of Using Case Studies. Journal of College Science Teaching 37(1): 34–38.
Herreid, C.F. (2006) Clicker Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching 36(2): 43–47.
Herreid, C.F. (2006) Using Cases to Teach Science. In: The Handbook of College Science Teaching. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
Herreid, C.F. (2006) The Case Study Method in the STEM Classroom. Journal of Metropolitain Universities 17(4): 30–40.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) The Business End of Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching 35(3): 12–14.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) The Interrupted Case Method. Journal of College Science Teaching 35(2): 4–5.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Mom Always Liked You Best. Journal of College Science Teaching 35(2): 10–14.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right? Journal of College Science Teaching 35(1): 12–14.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Using Novels as Bases for Case Studies. Journal of College Science Teaching 34(7): 10–11.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Because Wisdom Can’t Be Told. Peer Review 7(2): 30–31.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Science Education Needs Case Studies. The Scientist 19(4): 10.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) The Pima Experience: Three Easy Pieces. Journal of College Science Teaching 34(6) :8–11.
Herreid, C. F. (2005) Making a Case for Science. UB Today.
Herreid, C.F. (2005) Racism and All Sorts of Politically Correct isms in Case Studies. What Are We to Do? Journal of College Science Teaching 34(3): 10–11.
Stonefoot, S.G. and C.F. Herreid (2004) Extrasensory Perception—Pseudoscience? Journal of College Science Teaching 34(2): 30–34.
Herreid, C.F. (2004) What’s Going on in the Physical Sciences? Where are all the Case Studies? Journal of College Science Teaching 34(1): 8–9.
Herreid, C.F. (2004) Can Case Studies be used to Teach Critical Thinking? Journal of College Science Teaching 33(6): 12–14.
Herreid, C.F. (2004) The Case of the Dividing Cell: Mitosis and Meiosis in the Cellular Court. Part II—Court is Back in Session. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(5): 12–17.
Herreid, C.F. (2004) The Case of the Dividing Cell: Mitosis and Meiosis in the Cellular Court. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(4): 10–13.
Herreid, C.F. (2004) Coplas de Ciego. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(4): 6.
Herreid, C. F. (2004) Why a Case-Based Course Failed: An Analysis of an Ill-fated Experiment. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(3): 8–11.
Herreid, C. F. (2003) Response to: The Problem with Problem-based Medical Education. Biochem. Mol. Bio. Ed 31: 253–254.
Herreid, C.F. (2003) Larry Finally Wrote His Book. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(1) :8–10.
Herreid, C.F. (2003) A Letter to Garcia. Journal of College Science Teaching 32(7): 426–428.
Herreid, C. F. (2003) The Death of Problem-Based Learning? Journal of College Science Teaching . 32(6): 364–366.
Herreid, C. F. (2002) Using Case Studies in Science—And Still Covering Content. In Team Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups (Ed. L. Michaelson, A. Knight & L. Fink) Praeger, Westport, Conn., pp.109–118.
Herreid, C.F. (2002) Naming Names. Journal of College Science Teaching 32(3): 162–163.
Herreid, C.F. (2002) Harry Potter and the Magic of Story Telling. Journal of College Science Teaching 32(1): 4–5.
Vail, S., and C.F. Herreid, (2002) Little Mito: The Story of the Origins of a Cell. Journal of College Science Teaching 32(1): 60–63.
Herreid, C.F. (2002) Twixt Fact and Fiction. Journal of College Science Teaching 31(7): 428–430.
Herreid, C.F. (2002) The Way of All Flesch: The Art of Writing Readable Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching 31(5): 288–291.
Herreid, C.F. (2001) The Maiden and the Witch: The Crippling Undergraduate Experience. Journal of College Science Teaching 31(2): 87–88.
Herreid, C.F. (2001) Storytellers Box. Journal of College Science Teaching 31(1): 6.
Herreid, C.F. (2001) When Justice Peeks: Evaluating Students in Case Study Teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching 30(7): 430–433.
Herreid, C.F. (2001) Don’t! What Not to Do When Teaching Cases. Journal of College Science Teaching 30(5): 292–294.
Herreid, C.F. (2000) I Never Knew Joe Paterno: An Essay on Teamwork and Love. Journal of College Science Teaching 30(3): 158–161.
Herreid, C.F. (2000) Storytellers: Spicing up the Classroom with Good Stories. Journal of College Science Teaching 30(1): 6.
Herreid, C.F. (2000) The Last Teacher: Technology and the Demise of the University. Journal of College Science Teaching 29(6): 423–427.
Herreid, C.F. (2000) Lallapalooza. Journal of College Science Teaching 29(5): 294–295.
Herreid, C.F. (2000) And All that Jazz: An Essay Extolling the Virtues of Writing Case Teaching Notes. Journal of College Science Teaching 29(4): 225–228.
Herreid, C.F. (1999) Cooking with Betty Crocker: A Recipe for Case Writing. Journal of College Science Teaching 29(3): 156–158.
Herreid, C.F. (1999) Saint Anthony and the Chicken Poop. Journal of College Science Teachin g 29(1): 13–16.
Herreid, C.F. (1999) Dialogues as Case Studies: A Discussion on Human Cloning. Journal of College Science Teaching 28(4): 245.
Herreid, C.F. (1999) The Bee and the Groundhog. Journal of College Science Teaching 28(4): 226–228.