Free online university gets high first marks

University of the People, one of the newest members of the free online education arena, is adding academic heft with credentialed faculty and advisors, and nine out of 10 students who took classes in its first term said they would recommend the university to family and friends.

Launched in September with $1 million in startup money from founder and president Shai Reshef, University of the People’s inaugural class included 179 students who took web-based college courses free of charge, only paying between $10 and $100 to process exams taken at the end of the semester.

The charge depends on the student’s country of residence. Admissions, study materials, and online interaction with faculty members that include retired and working professors, experts from various fields, and graduate students are available at no cost.

A university poll released last month showed that 90 percent of respondents from the first class said they would "definitely or likely recommend the school to their peers and family."

The online school also unveiled demographic information for the first time. The 120 new students joining University of the People for its second term–which began Nov. 19–are between 18 and 63 years old and hail from 47 countries.

Eighty-two students in the newest class are taking business administration courses, and 38 are enrolled in computer science classes.

University officials plan to expand their course offerings in the coming years. University of the People’s third term starts in mid-January, Reshef said. University officials decided to split the school year into five terms instead of three because the institution’s pedagogy called for shorter, more focused lessons and reviews.

Officials were somewhat surprised by students’ overwhelming approval, Reshef said, because faculty members are searching for the best ways to manage classes that include students proficient in English and others who speak English as a second language.

"We expected some bumps in the road, and we’re still expecting them," Reshef said. "There will always be surprises. And not everything was smooth and perfect, but our students are happy with the opportunity we provide them, so they’re patient with us."

Reshef said University of the People professors documented stark contrasts in class participation. Whereas American students would ask series of questions during online lectures, students from Asian countries rarely followed up with queries.

"In some cultures, asking questions is very positive," he said. "In some cultures, it’s an admittance of not knowing the material … so it is all about perception."

Reshef announced this month that David Harris Cohen, former vice president and dean of Columbia University, and Alexander Tuzhilin, a New York University professor of information systems, were named as the university’s provost and computer science chair, respectively.

Reshef said last summer that the university might one day pursue accreditation so students’ course credits are transferable to other institutions, and in an interview with eCampus News, he added that bringing Tuzhilin and Harris Cohen aboard would boost the school’s credibility.  

"I would guess that it wouldn’t hurt for accreditation someday," Reshef said. "Eventually, you would have to show you have credible people in charge of [the university]. … And we want the best academic people to join us in our endeavors."

Harris Cohen, who will now oversee academics for University of the People, served as Columbia’s dean of the faculty for arts and sciences from 1995 to 2003. He was also a professor of biological sciences and neuroscience in psychiatry.

Tuzhilin has held various positions with The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, and Ecole Nationale Superieure des Telecommunications in Paris.

His work has been published in 90 academic journals, and he has headed NYU’s computer science department for more than 20 years.

Adding academic heavyweights to the university’s leadership is the latest in a series of announcements that could give the school more widespread credibility.

Yale Law School’s Information Society Project (ISP) announced Sept. 22 that it would partner with University of the People in a project that seeks to learn how the web-based program might boost its validity among powerful world leaders.

The project, Reshef said, would benefit web-based schools worldwide that have struggled to gain acceptance from local and national education officials and legislators.

Yale’s ISP, founded a decade ago, brings together policy makers, scholars, activists, and students to focus on five main areas of research: protecting and expanding access to knowledge via the internet; finding solutions for social, legal, and ethical problems that crop up in the information age; granting teachers better access to online course materials; encouraging intellectual property reform globally; and creating policies that will protect civil rights in a web-based environment.

Link:

University of the People

tags

Study: Schools face post-stimulus shortfalls

A stimulus funding cliff is approaching in education.

A stimulus funding cliff is approaching in education.

Using federal stimulus money to avoid layoffs at schools is going to create a shortfall even more difficult for states and schools to contend with when that money runs out, according to a government study.

New York alone will see a $2 billion shortfall after stimulus money ends in 2011-12, and that could drive up some of the nation’s highest local property taxes another 8 percent, according to the analysis by state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.

“This isn’t just a New York problem,” DiNapoli said in an early and detailed analysis of school aid after federal stimulus funds run out in 2011-12. “Other states across the country will face a similar dilemma if they used stimulus money to plug budget holes instead of paying for one-time expenses.

“Stimulus funding is not a recurring revenue; it shouldn’t be used for recurring expenses.”
A Government Accountability Office report released a week ago found 63 percent of states in a representative sample planned to use 50 percent of their school stimulus money to retain jobs. Other uses were nonrecurring items including equipment.

In July, the GAO cautioned that many states facing deep deficits were using stimulus dollars to fill budget holes and avoid layoffs, rather than reforms that could mean longer-term savings or programs such as building new schools.

The U.S. Education Department (ED) encouraged schools to diversify the use of stimulus money to ward off huge budget gaps when it runs out, said spokeswoman Sandra Abrevaya.

“When one saves a job, it doesn’t mean one saves it indefinitely,” she said.

In California, the stimulus was credited with saving or creating 62,000 jobs in public schools and state universities. Utah reported saving about 2,600 teaching jobs. In both states, education jobs represented about two-thirds of the total number of jobs said to be created or saved by the stimulus. Missouri reported more than 8,500 school jobs, Minnesota more than 5,900. In Michigan, where officials said 19,500 jobs have been saved or created, three out of four were in education.

The Congressional Budget Office has noted the difficulty of measuring the number of jobs saved by the stimulus. “It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package,” a CBO report said last month.

The early public warning mirrors internal worries among state budget officers nationwide.

“They have to manage through the decline and end of the Recovery Act funds, but they know it’s unlikely that improved revenues–if they improve–can cover the recovery fund amounts,” said Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of Business Officers.

The post-stimulus era is often called “the cliff.”

In Pennsylvania, ED spokesman Michael Race says the cliff was considered in budget negotiations as a consequence of using the federal money. He says it’s difficult right now to give a specific answer about a funding drop-off since many variables have yet to play out, such as how much the governor will propose to increase school funding, and whether state revenues recover.

Though Washington is talking about another federal stimulus package, states and schools aren’t expected to get another infusion of cash. But school advocates in New York have already starting to prepare a case that schools will need more federal money.

School districts faced with raising taxes to make up for stimulus money “are going to have to put together some contingency plans,” said B. Jason Brooks, director of research and communications for the Foundation for Education Reform & Accountability, a think tank.

“There may be massive teacher layoffs,” he added.

And the future may be even darker. Depressed housing values–which lag about three years behind a recession–will hurt the ability of schools and local governments to raise tax revenue, said Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank in Washington.

“The question is, is this the new normal?” he asked. “Schools need to get used to the idea that lean times are here and they are here to stay.”

tags

iPods have Minnesota students giddy about learning

At Somerset Elementary and other schools in the West St. Paul-Mendota Heights-Eagan district, the iPod Touch has taken classrooms by storm, reports the St. Paul Pioneer Press. For kids there, math and spelling activities that used to seem, well, booooring have a sudden allure on an iPod. This was clear on a recent morning in a room filled with students raptly tapping, scrolling, and swiping. Fourth-grade teacher Jean Stai had to impose little discipline as her kids lost themselves in Word Salad, a vocabulary program, TanZen, a geometry app, and States and Capitols, among others. Her biggest challenge appeared to be prying the kids from one app so they’d switch to another. The students were handed sheets with short, personalized lists of apps each had to try. "They’re so engaged," Stai said. "Suddenly, it’s not so horrifying to study your facts tables. It is like a game. What would be tedious with paper and pencil is no longer so with bright colors and things moving around." Somerset recently obtained an iPod Touch mini-lab of sorts–consisting of a storage-and-charging cart on wheels with dozens of the players, along with a laptop for downloading educational apps and transferring them to the players. Teachers take turns checking out the cart one or more times a week and handing out the charged-up iPods to students for some high-tech learning that, to the kids, feels a lot like playtime. Stai is not yet convinced iPods will have substantive, lasting educational value. But she doesn’t discount the students’ excitement in the two months or so she has been using iPods in class. "Enthusiasm is important," she said…

Click here for the full story

tags

Opinion: How competition fails our students

Zeller advocates mastery of educational concepts before students are encouraged to compete in the classroom.

Zeller advocates mastery of educational concepts before students are encouraged to compete in the classroom.

(Editor’s note: Brent Zeller is the author of the provocative book Evolutionary Education: Moving Beyond Our Competitive Compulsion. Here, he explains why he believes competition is detrimental to learning. Comments are welcome at the bottom of the page.)

In 1988, after 20 years of learning and playing tennis, and 14 years of teaching it to thousands of students, I had a simple realization: The introduction of competition before we achieve proficiency in the fundamental physical, mental, and emotional skills compromises all aspects of the learning process.

Like many realizations, mine was a dawning awareness of a truth dimly intuited for years that in retrospect seemed obvious. Like most people, I had believed in the value of competition without ever questioning it.

It was how I had been taught, was all I had ever known, and everyone I knew believed it, too.

Although there is widespread recognition of the many problems in our educational system, there is little recognition or acknowledgement of what I now see as our educational system’s fatal flaw–the competitive model on which it is based.

While people across the political and educational spectrum agree that our educational system is flawed and propose various, often contradictory, solutions, almost all affirm the value and necessity of competition in the learning process.

Competitive learning is widespread and routine in our educational system. In almost every school, sport, subject, and skill, beginning students are thrown prematurely into some form of competition (including the pressure to seek a good grade), long before they have even approached basic competence. Competition is often introduced at the very start of a student’s involvement with a subject, sport, or activity.

Our collective faith in the competitive system is conditioned and inherited, not based in objective evidence. The belief that a competitive learning environment is the ideal learning environment doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

It is based on an implausible argument that the pressure and stress of competition, the fear of the consequences of losing, the aggressive striving against others, and the desire for the rewards of winning, somehow focuses attention, ignites motivation, develops strength, builds character, and produces excellence. Yet this belief is built on denial and rationalization, for it ignores the negative impact and consequences of premature competition on children and adult students.

After my epiphany in 1988, I reexamined my lifelong experience as a student, competitor, and teacher. I noticed the now-apparent flaws and fallacies of the competitive model, and came to an obvious and logical conclusion: The prevalence of competition in the learning process is the primary reason that most people do not achieve true excellence, mastery, or fulfill their potential in school, sports, music, and almost every other field of learning.

The skills developed in a competitive system occur despite–rather than because of–competition. Competition has motivated a small percentage of people to great accomplishment. But much of that motivation comes from an unhealthy emphasis on winning, fear of losing, and an immature self-esteem derived from defeating others and thereby gaining status.

tags

Opinion: How competition fails our students

(Editor’s note: Brent Zeller is the author of the provocative book Evolutionary Education: Moving Beyond Our Competitive Compulsion. Here, he explains why he believes competition is detrimental to learning. Comments are welcome at the bottom of the page.)

In 1988, after 20 years of learning and playing tennis, and 14 years of teaching it to thousands of students, I had a simple realization: The introduction of competition before we achieve proficiency in the fundamental physical, mental, and emotional skills compromises all aspects of the learning process.

Like many realizations, mine was a dawning awareness of a truth dimly intuited for years that in retrospect seemed obvious. Like most people, I had believed in the value of competition without ever questioning it. It was how I had been taught, was all I had ever known, and everyone I knew believed it, too.

Although there is widespread recognition of the many problems in our educational system, there is little recognition or acknowledgement of what I now see as our educational system’s fatal flaw–the competitive model on which it is based. While people across the political and educational spectrum agree that our educational system is flawed and propose various, often contradictory, solutions, almost all affirm the value and necessity of competition in the learning process.

Competitive learning is widespread and routine in our educational system. In almost every school, sport, subject, and skill, beginning students are thrown prematurely into some form of competition (including the pressure to achieve a good grade), long before they have even approached basic competence. Competition is often introduced at the very start of a student’s involvement with a subject, sport, or activity.

Our collective faith in the competitive system is conditioned and inherited, not based in objective evidence. The belief that a competitive learning environment is the ideal learning environment doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. It is based on an implausible argument that the pressure and stress of competition, the fear of the consequences of losing, the aggressive striving against others, and the desire for the rewards of winning, somehow focuses attention, ignites motivation, develops strength, builds character, and produces excellence. Yet this belief is built on denial and rationalization, for it ignores the negative impact and consequences of premature competition on children and adult students.

After my epiphany in 1988, I reexamined my lifelong experience as a student, competitor, and teacher. I noticed the now-apparent flaws and fallacies of the competitive model, and came to an obvious and logical conclusion: The prevalence of competition in the learning process is the primary reason that most people do not achieve true excellence, mastery, or fulfill their potential in school, sports, music, and almost every other field of learning. The skills developed in a competitive system occur despite–rather than because of–competition. Competition has motivated a small percentage of people to great accomplishment. But much of that motivation comes from an unhealthy emphasis on winning, fear of losing, and an immature self-esteem derived from defeating others and thereby gaining status. Rather than producing the highest level of skill among the greatest number of people, competition produces a majority of "losers," and a handful of "winners" of inconsistent ability, unfulfilled potential, and relative immaturity.

If we objectively examine the real and alleged benefits of our competitive educational system, we see that it does not live up to its hype. Introducing competition into the learning process is often stressful and counter-productive, causing far more harm than good. For a majority of students, a competitive learning environment does not increase motivation, improve performance, or support healthy emotional development. It interferes with concentration and diminishes enjoyment, performance, and motivation. It is disruptive to learning and makes achieving excellence and mastery more difficult. Premature competition introduces conflict and performance anxiety into the learning process, while tacitly encouraging cheating and other forms of "poor sportsmanship." All these things undermine self-esteem, healthy character development, and interpersonal relations.

 When competition is introduced into the learning process, learning becomes a contest. The focus and emphasis shift from learning to winning–and the fear of losing or failing. When winning is over-emphasized, and "losing" is demonized, the entire process of learning, playing, performing, etc., is seen through a distorted, anxiety-producing lens. The learning process is contaminated by the desire to win (rather than to learn) and to be seen as a winner, as well as by fears of losing and being seen as a loser. Yet these unhealthy aspects of the competitive model are often ignored, denied, rationalized, and even made to seem "positives."

My experience and observation have shown me that the premature introduction of competition into the learning process produces far more negative than positive effects and impedes rather than enhances learning and performance levels. In fact, if competition were a drug, the Food and Drug Administration would ban it for having too many adverse side effects.

That most people find it difficult to imagine an alternative to competitive behavior shows how deeply programmed this belief has become. Psychologist Alfie Kohn points to this conditioned cellular memory via "socialization" when he writes: "That most of us fail to consider the alternatives to competition is a testament to the effectiveness of our socialization. We have been trained not only to compete but to believe in competition." And sociologist David Riesman writes: "First we are systematically socialized to compete–and to want to compete–and then the results are cited as evidence of competition’s inevitability."

I do not suggest eliminating competition. I am arguing against its premature introduction into the learning process. I am asking if it is wise and effective to force children into competition while they are learning, before they achieve basic proficiency. Competition can now take its rightful place as an advanced aspect of any activity. Until we have developed essential physical, mental, and emotional skills, we are not ready to compete. Until then, competition interferes with the learning process and diminishes our chances of achieving proficiency, and even emotional maturity. 

I do not have all the answers for how this model will work at all levels, but because I know that true peak performance can only occur when everyone is helping us be our best, there must be some way to have it work in higher education as well as K-12. The key thing here is that we need to help our species evolve to higher levels of consciousness, and the only way I believe that is possible is through a non-competitive learning system.

We need to reexamine competition, to see where and when it is useful, and where and when it creates problems. The next evolution in learning will occur in a healthier cooperative model with a skill-to-mastery-based focus. Rather than encouraging students to compete with one another for grades, prizes, and status, this new model will facilitate deeper learning, intellectual acuity, emotional maturity, and a genuine self-esteem derived from excellence and mastery. It will raise the overall level of skill, knowledge, and creativity and allow everyone, from the least to the most talented, to fulfill his or her potential and contribute to the whole. 

I propose something along the lines of the Kumon method, which designs a series of tests that go from the most basic material to the most advanced. People who have mastered the material in any subject would design these series of tests. As with the Kumon method, the only way anyone can go on to the next test is by getting 100 percent on the more basic material. This ensures mastery of the more basic material at every level and makes it more likely that someone will be able to comprehend the more advanced material.

This approach would eliminate grades; students would either get 100 percent or they would retake the test material. I believe one of the big problems in education is that we pass people along to the next level before they know all of the more fundamental material. At some point, this approach makes it difficult to grasp the more advanced material, and learning stalls. Obviously, there are certain subjects where evaluation is more subjective and not as clear cut as math, language, or music, and different ways of evaluation will need to be worked out in those subjects.

A non-competitive learning system develops concentration, relaxation, emotional maturity, healthy camaraderie, and fundamental skills. By emphasizing enjoyment of an activity and the learning process for its own sake, and de-emphasizing the importance of winning, losing, and external rewards, it diminishes negative emotional states and behaviors. Children especially thrive in a non-competitive learning environment, and they naturally develop the fundamental skills without the unpleasant stresses and emotions inevitably triggered by premature competition. 

Competition might be part of human nature, but it need not dominate human nature and conduct. By adopting cooperative, non-competitive, skill-to-mastery-based models of teaching, learning and living, we can all rise above the limitations of our competitive system and fulfill our greater potential as individuals and as a species.

Link:

Evolutionary Education: Moving Beyond Our Competitive Compulsion

tags

‘Augmented reality’ quickly becoming real

Augmented reality is catching on in education

Augmented reality is catching on among software developers.

You’re walking down the street, looking for a good place to eat off-campus. You hold up your cell phone and use it like the viewfinder on a camera, so the screen shows what’s in front of you. But it also shows things you couldn’t see before: Brightly colored markers indicating nearby restaurants and bars.

Turn a corner, and the markers reflect the new scene. Click a marker for a restaurant, and you can see customer reviews and price information. Decide you’d rather be sightseeing? The indicators are easily changed to give information about the buildings you’re passing.

This computer-enhanced view of the world is not just available to cyborgs in science-fiction movies. Increasingly, it can be found on cell phones, for free or on the cheap, through programs that provide “augmented reality.”

These applications take advantage of the phones’ GPS and compass features and access to high-speed wireless networks to mash up super-local web content with the world that surrounds the user.

That means you can see available apartments on the block you’re moseying down. You can view photos other people have taken at the park you’re passing, or find the nearest bus stop, campus coffee shop, or hotel room–all by holding your phone up and peering at its screen.

The possibilities for melding the virtual and actual worlds have just started to become apparent. There’s even growing interest in applying augmented reality to all levels of education.

The first phones with Google’s Android operating system, which enables augmented reality, have come out in the past year. Apple’s iPhone became augmented-reality-friendly with the compass that debuted in June on the iPhone 3GS. Apple also recently joined Google in making it possible for software developers to overlay images on the phone’s camera view.

As cell phones get even smarter and GPS and wireless networks improve, we might soon be spending more time in a virtually enhanced world, using information gathered from the internet to inform everything from eating, to learning, to playing video games.

One company working to make this happen is Amsterdam-based Layar, which recently released an augmented reality browser by the same name for Android phones. Layar lets you search for things on Google, but it delivers the results based on your location, which it determines from your phone’s GPS readout. So you can search for, say, a bike shop or a bookstore close to where you happen to be.

If you don’t feel like actively searching, you can sign up to have certain kinds of information automatically appear on your cell-phone screen. For instance, Layar lets other companies build on its system to overlay information about such places as skateboarding spots and local landmarks. A startup called Brightkite uses Layar to let people post virtual tags, with their locations and activities, that other people can see if they use the same app.

Layar’s goal is to create a “serendipitous experience” that lets you discover new things about your surroundings, says co-creator Maarten Lens-Fitzgerald.

For a year, Yelp, a web site with business reviews written by customers, had an iPhone app that used the device’s GPS and wireless internet connectivity to deliver local search results. But when the iPhone got a compass, bloggers wondered whether Yelp would go further and make its app overlay information onto a real-time view of the world. After noticing the speculation, Yelp quietly created such an app this summer, spokesman Vince Sollitto said.

tags

New programs aim to lure students into digital jobs

The country needs more cool nerds — people who can use computing in ways that haven’t even been thought of yet. And high schools are starting to do their part, reports the New York Times. Hybrid careers that combine computing with other fields will increasingly be the new American jobs of the future, labor experts say. But not enough young people are embracing computing–often because they are leery of being branded nerds. Educators and technologists say two things need to change: the image of computing work, and computer-science education in high schools. Professional organizations like the Association for Computing Machinery and the National Science Foundation are pushing for these changes, but so are major technology companies such as Google, Microsoft and Intel. One step in their campaign came the week of Dec. 7, National Computer Science Education Week, which was celebrated with events in schools and online. Today, introductory computer-science courses are too often focused on teaching students to use software like word processing and spreadsheet programs, said Janice C. Cuny, a program director at the National Science Foundation. The agency is working to change this by developing a new introductory high school course and seeking to overhaul Advanced Placement courses as well. It hopes to train 10,000 high school teachers in the modernized courses by 2015. One goal, Cuny and others say, is to explain the steady march and broad reach of computing across the sciences, industries, culture, and society. That message must resonate with parents and school administrators, they say, if local school districts are to expand their computer-science programs… 

Click here for the full story

tags

Video game watchdog shuts down, victim of economy

The National Institute on Media and the Family is closing its doors, a victim of the poor economy, reports the Associated Press. Founder David Walsh said when he was assembling his first report card on video game violence 13 years ago, children were attacking on-screen monsters or aliens with imaginary chain saws and guns. "When I saw kids as young as 8, 9 years old literally doing facial contortions as they killed and dismembered people, it was pretty shocking. And I think what happened is a lot of other people got shocked as well," Walsh recalls. "I don’t think we want our kids’ culture defined by killing, mayhem, and dismemberment as entertainment." That first report card, which singled out bloody first-person shooter games "Doom" and "Duke Nukem," made an instant splash on Capitol Hill in 1996 and made the annual reports issued each holiday season by Walsh’s organization a news fixture. But there was no video game report card this year, and there won’t be any more. Walsh is packing his books as his staff of eight full-time employees prepares to shut down Dec. 23. "Fundraising has been more and more difficult," Walsh said. "It really wasn’t that we put ourselves out of business, because the technology is changing so quickly, the issues just won’t quit."

Click here for the full story

tags

For-profit colleges face mounting scrutiny

Officials at for-profit colleges and universities are facing a chorus of public criticism after accusations of shady student recruiter practices and a U.S. Department of Education (ED) report that showed twice as many students at for-profit schools have defaulted on their college loans compared to students attending nonprofit and public colleges.

The growing criticism comes as new research suggests for-profit colleges are gaining market share among online learners as the recession drives more people back to school.

Students who took out loans to pay for education at commercial institutions such as the University of Phoenix and DeVry University had a 21-percent default rate within three years, according to the Dec. 14 ED report, which used data from students who began loan repayment in fiscal year 2007. For-profit schools’ default rate in fiscal 2006 was 18 percent.

Overall, American college students defaulted at a 12-percent rate, up from 9 percent the year before.

A day after ED released its report, Apollo Group Inc.—the University of Phoenix’s parent company—agreed to a $78.5 million settlement after a six-year court battle that started when former university employees filed a lawsuit claiming recruiters were paid based on the number of students they enrolled, a practice that violates federal law.

Apollo Group denied the former plaintiffs’ allegations, dismissing them as disgruntled former employees and claiming their schools’ recruiting practices were within federal guidelines. But the hefty settlement did little to quell public criticism.

Congressman Elijah E. Cummings, D-Md., urged lawmakers to launch hearings to investigate common practices in publicly-traded colleges and universities. A Congressional investigation, Cummings said, would "shine a light on the for-profit education industry and provide the American people with a clear picture of the true costs of education."

Read the full story at eCampus News

tags

Excel Recovery Tool Now Recovers Excel Data Items More Quickly

Madrid, Spain, December 21, 2009 – SysTools, a fast progressing software development company, specializes in producing software tools for data recovery and some more similar data needs of users worldwide. The company keeps launching new and improved versions of its software tools as per the increased needs of users in the ever changing world. SysTools Excel Recovery is a software tool offered by the company for Excel corruption recovery. Many users across different parts are using this Excel spreadsheet repair tool to repair corrupt Excel file. Now, this

Excel Recovery tool

has been updated and the new version has come with an advanced benefit for the users.

The advanced benefit associated with the latest version of SysTools Excel Recovery tool is of quick recovery. The software will use faster algorithms to facilitate speedier recovery than the earlier versions could perform. Faster algorithms would allow quicker loading of large Excel files. Users can repair excel worksheets using this Excel Recovery tool more speedily than ever.

This enhanced benefit is greatly advantageous for those users who are always time-pressed and who are always in search of things that save their time to a great extent. This tool is one such time-saving Excel file recovery software that performs quick recovery of texts, numbers, charts, images etc from corrupt XLS files of MS Excel.

The latest version of this Excel repair utility is available at the same price as before – $49 for the Personal License. This updated version of the Excel Recovery tool has all the previously existing features along with the added benefit of much faster Excel recovery. All the required information about the price and features of this updated version of the SysTools Excel Recovery Software is available on the website itself. The advanced version can be downloaded from the http://www.excelrecoverytool.com website.


tags