The Last Hurrah: Reflections on MSLD 500

Reflect on your perceived value of this course. Include both positive and negative aspects of your experience. What might you have done to improve your learning experience in this course? How might the University or your instructor provide additional support for your learning? Were there topics covered in this course that seem particularly relevant or irrelevant to your experiences and to what you expect to come in future courses?

Graduating from my undergraduate two years ago, I never thought it would take me so long to go back to school. My closest friends all started their Master’s (and some have already completed them) and I felt so far behind. I also felt confused. After straddling two career directions during undergrad and post-graduation, I really was not sure if I could continue to ride both trains or if I needed to put my whole butt in one seat… or if I wanted to try something new. So, in attempting to focus myself, I applied to a ton of grad schools a year ago. I applied to MBA programs, MBA/JD programs, MPA/MBA programs, and one or two creative writing programs; I knew I wanted to get the most degrees in the least amount of time, and I worried of becoming bored through doing only one focused program. Besides, I’d find something to do with one of them, right? I did not want to waste money, accrue new debt or have a degree (or two) worth nada. I also did not want to shift to a focus far out of alignment with my undergraduate degrees, and had worked up arguments for the Master’s transition into all of these programs from my past studies. Though I received some impressive acceptance letters, the money was not there for most of them. I was going to have to work part-time as a TA or GA and go to school full-time; I was unsure if I wanted to eat cup-o-noodles every night for two years.

Before I headed to Arizona to work for ERAU, I was enrolled in a Master’s of Higher Education Leadership program at a large university in the south. I had settled one having a decent amount of debt for a degree I thought I’d probably use. It did not feel right – the place, the time, the balancing act of driving two hours three days a week for classes, working a part-time job on campus to fill the gap my employer refused to, and working full-time to have a place to stay. The opportunity to go to school and work where I lived was my blessing. Though I would have finished a degree by now if I had gone right into grad school, I cannot guarantee the degree I would have would be more than a one-liner on my resume. The opportunity to work on my Master’s through ERAU’s Worldwide Campus has been a grand combination of my needs.

One of the benefits of this course was that I seemed to always be able to incorporate the week’s theme to my everyday work. I loved the fallacies and could have stayed on them longer (it could be a course on its own). Being able to read with them in mind gave me red lights to seek when reviewing departmental paperwork and proposals, talking to my supervisees about their staff’s personal and group concerns and when making appeals of my own (particularly when I do educational advisements [judicial]). One of our papers focusing on personal and professional standards (A500.2.3.RB - Tell Your Story) applied directly to my professional work and how the way my thinking has changed over time. I believe this reflection directly impacts the way I lead and what I stand for. In totality, I believe the course helped me understand myself better as a supervisor.

One of my lowlights for this course was a disconnect between the annotated bibliographies and the Action Research Project. I became lost in whether the project was supposed to be about the Critical Thinking Test or the topic of our Annotated Bibliography research. Alas, this is a setback of the online format, as I times wished that I had face-to-face contact with my classmates. It is much more difficult to pick someone’s brain through email (read: it’s easier to ignore people). Another personal critique is that I did not engage with classmates casually as much as would have liked to. I was surprised at how underutilized the Student Lounge was under Discussions. I planned to engage is lively conversations and debates on current events, as cohorts tend to; though I posted once, I believe I could have put more initiative into striking up conversation. I realize everyone has a life outside of class to attend to but I wanted to know more about how our different environments and backgrounds played into how we interacted on a less formal level.

I appreciated the option of Skyping my professor and the quick responses to emails from the professor. I believe the comments accompanying grading were mostly helpful and my professor’s participation on the class discussion board made me feel like there was an actual conversation taking place.

Great Expectations (for Presentations)

What makes a great presentation great?

As I have witnessed the worse displays of information anyone has ever had to endure (fallacy?), I consider myself an expert on this topic. I have seen over a thousand presentations in my lifetime.

Half have conspired with poor, innocent PowerPoint to commit audio-visual attempted murder. Perhaps a quarter have been without the use of technology. Within the last quarter, half were were so painful, I have wiped them from my memory. I only remember the presenter standing in front of the room, then slow-clapping; everything else is a blur. Of the ones I do remember, however, many had these characteristics:

• Too much information is on the slide
• The presenter reads from the presentation
• The presenter is playing with something (i.e. a pen, a paper, their pocket lint, etc.)
• The dependence on fillers (i.e. "umm", "you know what I mean", things like that", "like", "basically", "so", etc.)
• The presenter is seemingly trapped behind a podium, desk or table
• No new oral information is added to the information on the presentation
• The presenter never makes eye contact with the audience
• Little to no audience participation is integrated
• Too little (boring/hard to read) or too much (seizure-inducing/hard to read) contrasting of slide colors

The other half of this quarter, a staggering eighth of all presentations, have been spectacular. Most of them have been TED Talks.

TED Talks have been the saving grace for the demonstration of public speaking. They are short, usually experienced-based talks on technology, health, cultural diversity, and global issues. I could go into how incredible the mission of TED is, which is to spread ideas worldwide for free and inspire conversations about the world around us. This is not the goal of every presentation, but what if we, as individuals, set this as a goal to reach for? The aspects of TED Talks which make them entertaining (and thus, memorable) are:

• The presenter is always looking at the audience
• The presenters move: they pace, they use their hands, they smile
• The presenters make the audience laugh
• Usually there are no podiums to hide behind
• Presenters are holding nothing more in their hands than a presentation remote (never a paper or 3x5 cards)
• The shots change every 15 seconds
• The slides presenters use are always one-liners, pictures or videos; usually combinations of these are utilized

I believe three of these characteristics are what make most presentations successful: looking at the audience instead of the material, deliberately moving about the presentation space, and using visual aids. Making a PowerPoint is easy; presenting it is difficult. Presenting involves knowing your stuff. It means practicing the approach you will use to connect with your audience.

I have found that my most successful presentations have involved not only moving around myself, but integrating activities to get viewers moving. I connect with them through using short videos which explain an idea better than I can, usually through demonstrating what cannot be demonstrated within the confines of a classroom. As I stated, one of the aspects of TED Talks which keeps them visually interesting is shot transitions. You cannot make the "scene changes" in the classroom easily, which is why I incorporate the audience into the presentation. If they are moving, their viewpoint changes. I also set my PowerPoints to transition automatically; this way, I do not have anything in my hands to play with. I also know when to move on to a new idea. It paces out my presentation and it looks intuitive. 

I do not allow my audience to get bored; I believe they can teach me something as I teach them. I ask them questions. I want them to ask questions, and to comment, throughout the presentation. I also add games (depending on the audience) to my presentations. For example, I will add one small, strange icon throughout the slides which I introduce to the viewers at the beginning. I tell them that whenever they see it, to do whatever the icon is doing. Whoever the first person is gets a piece of candy.

Never underestimate the power of candy. Incentive is a fine reason for doing just about anything; to beg for altruism, even passively, is unrealistic. It sounds strange, but it is a great way for people to stay focused on the presentation instead of falling asleep or playing with their cell phones.

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is the empirical information gathering process. This mode of research involves the researcher being distant and objective. The researcher knows in advance what they are looking for, and asks specific questions to test a hypothesis they have develop which will gather answers. The main characteristic of quantitative data is the information gathered will be numerical data. The information will be analyzed through mathematical calculations. Basic research designs are experimental, correlational, and survey. In correlational research variables are measured. The purpose is to identify the relationship between the variables. In experimental research, variables are manipulated, and the effects of this manipulation is measured upon the dependent variable. In surveys, researchers ask participants questions about the variable within the study.
When using quantitative research, one must know clearly what needs to be examined. Sometimes quantitative researchers work with large data sets; in contrast, qualitative researchers work with small groups, and sometimes, only one subject. The presence of an independent variable and dependent variable are key qualifications of quantitative research, as qualitative research is about discovery, not testing. An independent variable is the portion of the study the researcher makes a hypothesis on. This variable is the portion manipulated by the researcher. The dependent variables are the factors not manipulated, but should change with the changes in the independent variable.

The considerations of quantitative data are objectivity, type of design chosen, accuracy, feasibility, and validity. We want to be able to control the focus of our study. The review of the literature should be written in the way that the reader can judge and acknowledge the objectivity of the researcher. The eye must be narrow for this type of researcher. The research design purpose gives a plan of what will be studied and how. You increase the control of the research study through being objective, which occurs by being a stoic standby instead of involving oneself with external factors. Accuracy is gained through the theoretical framework and the research review.
Feasibility deals with time, money and people. Is there enough time to complete the study? Is there enough subjects available to researcher? Is the study thoroughly financially sponsored? Is the study based on the researcher's skills and interests? Are steps being taken to secure the safety of the test subjects? A researcher wants to make sure the study participants are given equal study materials (the same information, the same survey, etc.). This is different from qualitative research, for qualitative research can change paths due to information given by a subject.

A researcher needs to reduce the outside variables that would disrupt study results. These extraneous variables are usually unexpected and can come into place through using consistent data collection procedures or a similar data set can reduce this effect. However, when you streamline the data set, you can limit the generality of the study and you limit the ability to use the study for other applications.

Randomization is where each subject in the study has an equal chance of being a part of the control group or the experimental group. Internal validity evaluates whether the independent variable really made a change in the dependent variable, which occurs by eliminating the likelihood of other factors as contrary explanations. History (an event inside or outside of the experiment), maturation (things that operate on or in a person over time outside of the experiment), death of a study subject, and selection bias (from the researcher) are all examples of threats to internal validity. External validity is the point in which study results can apply to other people and can be useful to other studies. The final conclusion of quantitative research involves a comparisons of means, and explaining the statistical significance of one's findings.

References

Brock, Stephen E. Descriptive & Correlational Research. Sacramento : California State University. Accessed at  http://www.csus.edu/indiv/b/brocks/Courses/EDS%20250/EDS%20250/PowerPoint/PDFs/Presentation%207.pdf 
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education, 5th edition. Routledge Falmer.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and

 mixed approaches (p. 34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is a type of scientific research which consists of an investigation that seeks answers to a question and uses a predefined set of procedures to answer the question. Qualitative research uses textual descriptions more than numeric data. Participant observation, in-depth interviews, and focus groups are the most common types of qualitative research.
The difference in Qualitative Versus Quantitative Research Paradigms Are in the framework, goals, question and answer format, and the rigor in research design. Qualitative research explores a specific topic, while Quantitative Research begins with a hypothesis on a specific question. Quantitative Research uses numerically-based formats of collecting data, like surveys and rigid observation. Probability sampling, when a small, randomly selected group of people are sampled to evaluate the attitude or opinion of the general population, is regularly used in quantitative research. Purposeful sampling is used in qualitative research to identify information-rich cases related to the occurrence studied. Qualitative research offers more flexible structures (which make it harder to compare data, like quantitative studies rely upon).  Instead of identifying a numerical variance, qualitative data must note differences in data through explaining detail. Qualitative research allows for more open-ended questions which can change based on participant response, while quantitative research established comparability through asking the same questions to all participants and assigning responses flat values. In general, qualitative research is more exploratory, though it involves extra work through stitching together valuable data throughout an experience which could take the researcher away from the original topic; it is more time-intensive and asks more from participants than an inflexible, impersonal, numbers-based survey would.
The benefit to executing qualitative research is that participants are free to use their own words to describe their experience, instead of maneuvering the set choices of others. This method makes it easier for a participant to understand, particularly since most are unfamiliar with scholarly writing and thus, scholarly research and (possibly) wording. Personality and communication style are lost within quantitative research, which come in handy when communicating through qualitative study. However, qualitative research also requires sensitivity that quantitative research may not. In searching for participants, it can be easier to have a mass of people fill out a survey where they understand the information will be generally anonymous, in comparison to a qualitative study which may involve becoming close with a person’s life, and will generally involve the observation of their family, community and culture. This process, known as naturalistic research, involves letting down walls that most would be uncomfortable allowing a stranger into. Lincoln and Guba (1985) state that generalizability, the appealing circumstance in which researchers apply macro conclusions to a micro research platform, can weaken validity. For example, in executing qualitative research in my last undergraduate year about the reasons why Mexican emigration to America is so alluring, I decided to study the people of the Yucatan peninsula. From this lens, I realized not all Mexicans wished to part with their homeland passport; my upper-middle class host family had no interest in leaving for the USA for any more than a trip to New York City or Disney World. This essentially shifted my research altogether; instead, I decided to focus my research on the dynamics between the host families within our program, mostly upper class households, in comparison to the domestic worker families within these wealthy households, focusing on access to higher education between these two groups. The ability to switch my study focus allowed for me to have more meaningful interactions with individuals within both dynamics. Each conversation became a part of my research, instead of sitting down with participants and having them fill out impersonal surveys. Smith and Heshusius (1986, January) claim that naturalistic research can offer only an "interpretation of the interpretations of others,” and that to assume an independent reality is "unacceptable" for the qualitative researcher. Though I agree that the closest a researcher can get to objective research is taking the perception of their perception of their interviewee, having an unplanned conversation and learning about lifestyle though everyday conversation allows for thoughts to be unstructured and free-flowing. Defenses are down; neither researcher nor interviewee are really identifying the research viability to the chats. It is up to the researcher to review the “data” to note what can be used for the study. Within the Mexican household, it was far easier for me to place a recorder down and catching the emotion within a talk, noting the activity of family members and capturing the culture through photos, than to construct study data based on numbers alone.
However, my experience could be challenged due to a perceived lack of objectivity. Numerical data, which comes from numerically-based studies and surveys, allows for researchers to track hard data and show their credibility with realistic figures (even though, in theory, statistics can be manufactured to support contradicting hypotheses). The challenge with qualitative research can be, though conversations and observations can be read by others, the way this information is perceived by the researcher or future readers may not agree. It is severely important that a researcher using the qualitative method is particularly detailed in objectively noting the environment they are conducting research in, the personalities and backgrounds of their participants, and in the connections they use to explain their conclusions.

References
Hoepfl, Marie C. Choosing Qualitative Research: A Primer for Technology Education Researchers (1997). Journal of Technology Education, Volume 9,  Number 1.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Smith, J. K., & Heshusius, L. (1986, January). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4-12. 

Critical Thinking Limitations and Dealing with Real People (Not the Whimsical Well-Wishers)

The Question:Take some time to reflect on the current state of your critical thinking competencies. Consider your thinking processes when you started the course. Have they changed at all? Have you been able to internalize any of the techniques and concepts you have learned? What will it take to make lasting, positive changes in the way you think?

Ballet Slippers or Adorable?

In a TED video by Sheena Iyengar (Ballet Slippers or Adorable?) on the art of choosing, Dr. Iyengar assumes that Americans believe the following when it comes to making choices:

Make your own choices,
More options lead to better choices, and
Never say no to choice.

There are two sides to each of these assumptions. It is a human right to make ones own choices. However, one must have the choice to relinquish one's own choice onto others who they deem to be more responsible or knowledgeable about a problem or to care for an issue. Sometimes the person they are relinquishing power over to is not more capable than they are to do the work for them, but the person has chosen for another to assume responsibility simply because they do not find it important enough to do themselves or they are not interested in doing it themselves.
 Examples of this action in play on an everyday level are:

• Travelers have an option to drive themselves to their destinations, assuming all responsibility for their arrival time, speed and overall safety; however, many travelers choose to use public transportation, as they believe it is a better choice (as assumption #2 suggests) for themselves (a convenience to not have to face the stressors of traffic, to be able to have extra time to complete work, listen to music or read while in route, saves on gas money and parking fees in some areas) and for the environment (reduces the use of natural resources and carbon emissions). However, if an injury occurs on public transportation due to the negligence of a bus driver, the 

• In a democratic republic such as the US, voters choose to vote for representatives who are elected to represent the beliefs of the people. Some people choose to not vote, and thus, have chosen to not exercise their right to choose their representatives.

In public transportation, it can be assumed without much difference in effect that a bus rider believes there are many benefits to themselves and to society for choosing public transportation over personal vehicles. Because there are macro benefits, I would agree that Iyengar's assumption that more options lead to better choices is true, because the choice gives us access to modes that are less attainable to the average person. Most American households have cars; however, many fewer have access to personal trains, planes, and boats/ships. Because of the benefits associated with these more expensive and technical ways to travel, it is a better choice to have these options than to limit oneself to only personal car or public bus. Taking a plane from South Carolina to Arizona is far more convenient than driving the 2000+ miles.In voting, there are many benefits to having choices on whom to vote for. It is quite important to have choices in voting because a democratic republic functions on having the person elected to be accountable for the use of the power given by the people. There are countless topics that constituents care about, and our goal as citizens to to elect the representatives whose views align in most, if not all, of the topics we care most about. For this reason, it would be unwise to limit the choices; however, there are set limits. Qualifications are limiters. A teenager cannot run for president of the United States. Perhaps I thought this person may be the best leader for my belief crusade. However, even if "the people" wanted this change, there are very few choices in how to un-limit the choice:
"First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today).  This first method of amendment is the only one used to date.  Second, the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the Convention's proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures."
Where I will differ from Iyengar is #3, saying no to choice. Simply stating no is not the only way to deny choice. For example, take the example on public transportation noted above; based on efficiency, it may be convenient to travel by air, but it is an expense choice. A lack of financial resources may block this choice. Time can also play into this being an option; if a traveler needs to get somewhere without planning ahead, it may not be possible, due to limited resources within this mode (all seats are booked for a late-minute Christmas flight, for example). In voting, saying no to choice may not involve a denial of choice, but red tape. Access to making change can serve as a denial of choice.
In conclusion, though choice is preferred, choice can be limited due to resources. Choice can also be perceived as our own when we are merely reacting to external influences, which stem from our desire to be seen as culturally in tune. Iyengar's notes this in her final example of perceived choice, when she exercises he Action Research skills on two women choosing pink nail polish for her. Iyengar asked two women to decide a nail polish color for her. Because she is blind, she asks for them to describe the differences of the colors to her. The women do a poor job, essentially using descriptive synonyms to  note meaningless differences within Iyengar's choices. Just as with the Walmart and Sprite soda options, to the commercialized consumer, there are obvious differences. However, without the labeling, we would be "blind" (as Iyengar actually is) to the differences, which are essentially absent to begin with.




Iyengar's comments on leadership note that sometimes companies take advantage of our assumption that choice is good, and with more choice, we will be able to make the best decisions for ourselves. Why? Because the leaders of these companies who give us all the choice we desire simultaneously market to us that we should not desire the most economically just buy, but the buy that most aptly displays freedom of choice; that is freedom defined as "the power to determine action without restraint." 
Instead of buying food that is healthy, we buy food that is marketed within pop culture. There are no commercials about apples, or home-cooked meals; there are dozens of commercials played during one hour of prime-time television which market fast food, chips, and heat-and-eat meals like Hamburger Helper or On-Cor. Even water, a nearly-free resource that runs out of the tap in most American homes, is packaged as if there is difference in quality between bottled and free-flowing. This mantra of unlimited choice can be unhealthy; restraint, or willpower, is a virtue. Perhaps American can leave from our Russian counterparts, who have blinders to the facade of choice we've come to appreciate. Iyengar notes a test in which Russians were told to choose between seven different types of soda:
"'How many choices are these?' Again and again, they perceived these seven different sodas, not as seven choices, but as one choice: soda or no soda. When I put out juice and water in addition to these seven sodas, now they perceived it as only three choices -- juice, water and soda. Compare this to the die-hard devotion of many Americans, not just to a particular flavor of soda, but to a particular brand."
Imagine if we were less inundated in media persuasion over choosing the  "most popular" product, and just bought the Walmart-brand lemon-lime soda instead of the Sprite. If we took the labels off, would the volume of the two products be the same? Yes; they both come in a 12-ounce option. They both come in a lime green plastic casing. They have the same ingredients (NEITHER CONTAINS REAL LEMON OR LIME, BTW) The Walmart brand, however, is cheaper; Walmart's brand also provides 10 extra calories per 12 oz than Sprite.
I have yet to see a Walmart commercial on their soda, but the brand loyalty to Sprite would not make a media push for this particular item reasonable; it presents a conflict of interest and does not promote the goals of marketing: to ensure profitability. 

References

MyFitnessPal. Nutrition Facts Soda, Sprite - Soda, Sprite. Accessed at  http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/149735399



MyFitnessPal. Nutrition Facts Walmart Great Value - Twist Up Lemon Lime Soda. Accessed at      http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/walmart-great-value-twist-up-lemon-lime-soda-109763519#
University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law.  Exploring Constitutional Conflicts, Article V: Amending the  Constitution, Accessed by http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/articleV.htm

Explore the Hunt Library

ERAU's two physical campuses both have unique library systems which I have begun to explore through my recent educational pursuits. Hazy Library upon the darling Prescott campus, allows for an opportunity for me to seek programming space, local news resources and a venti caramel macchiato when I encourage myself to walk across campus. The Hunt Library on Daytona Beach's campus, however, still alludes me.

Unfortunately, I cannot fly to Hunt Library to walk around Daytona Beach myself; I do not have the money for that right now. However, the Hunt Library website provides a YouTube video (which is hilarious) about the resources the Library offers. Like the Prescott equivalent, the Hunt Library seems to have a good variety of places for students to gather and study quietly independently, or to utilize  study rooms and computer labs to study together in groups. It has a variety of magazines, periodicals and newspapers from the area to nationally recognized outlets. it also has a great display of model airplanes.

As I explore the website for Hunt Library, I notice it has a plethora of resources for use by the public. During regular office hours (EST) I can ask questions for research to a live librarian. I have used this type of resource in the past and it is extremely helpful in figuring out where to begin what pursuing information of all types. It is more helpful to me to type my questions to a librarian than to call, as it gives me a history of what we discussed and the librarian can add links directly to our conversation, which I can refer to later. There is a journal collection, and the site provides "New eBooks This Week" which has more than 10 new books available weekly. Although most of these offerings are focused on engineering and space science, I found one that highlighted personal interests: 

Extremism in America

Subjects: Radicalism United States. - Social movements United States. - Ideology United States. - Right and left (Political science) United States.

How is the scholarly information you found in the library different from the typical information you find when you Google a leadership concept?


 The HathiTrust Digital Library is another interesting addition to Hunt. The site describes itself as "provid[ing] long-term preservation and access services for public domain and in copyright content from a variety of sources". Google does not always more scholarly journals to the forefront of their information; another way to think of Google is how we think of education as a pursuit. The harder something is to find, whether it be information or acquiring a technical degrees, the more valuable it tends to be!

I found a course available on the site called "Evaluating Sources." The goal of the program is to "provide students with a module which would reinforce the concepts of choosing credible and reliable sources." This relates directly to the developing the strengths needed to be successful in this course. Critical thinking study notes that being able to find and utilize quality academic resources allows for higher defense in logically concluding arguments and research problems.

References

Evaluating Sources. Retrieved at http://library.erau.edu/help/evaluating-sources/

HuntLibrary (2012). Let's take a trip to...the Hunt Library! Retrieved at http://library.erau.edu/about/tour.html. Linked from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5h3Ph4bl74#t=96

E

Tell Your Story

It is important to me to seen as reasonable, logical and effective.
As an Area Coordinator in the Department of Housing and Residence Life, I am responsible for the First Year Program – that is, I am consistently viewing the experience of newly-initiated adults into what they understand to be “the real world”. I have quickly recognized that the perceptions of young adults about what college is and the goals of a collegiate community do not align with the standards and procedures the real world follows. In many ways, it is my job to show them the inconsistencies between college and the real world – college policies are indeed more restrictive than laws – and I find it necessary to elaborate on why there is such a stark difference.

For example, students are not allowed to smoke on campus. Federal law states those over the age of 18 can smoke legally. Why would a university restrict the rights they have as Americans?
I can relate to such reasoning. In my past (and still) I have been (infamously) deemed an activist, a rebel rouser, and a muckraker. I strongly believe in the individual rights of people and the right to live one’s life freely without interference from others. I often rely on appeals to emotion, namely in the form of this statement: “If _____ doesn’t affect your life, why should you care if I do it?”
As I reflect upon my personal thought of individualism, a response calls within the back of my mind. Is my general statement valid? Perhaps I want to believe that anyone should be allowed to do what they want to do because I want to do whatever I want to do. For example, I want to speed for I can get to my destination. I do not think my speeding affects anyone else. Does anything we do only affect us? I fail to consider how others may feel unsafe on the road because of my speeding. There may be new drivers who are nervous and fearful of my careening around them. Even on a macro level, I refuse to notice how speeding increases exhaust, which adds contaminants to the air that my community breathes in. Speeding decreases my miles per gallon, increasing (ever so slightly) our nation’s dependence on oil Slippery slope? Perhaps. There are also solutions. I should leave earlier. I should shower at night. Perhaps there are legitimate purposes for why I should stop driving fast, and they are why there are driving laws. Someone is trying to protect me from myself, and protect society from people like me. The same goes for our university ruling on smoking. But what is the purpose of our policy?
We care because it does affect us as a university and our reputation could go up in smoke if we are not preparing our students for their reality. I was thoroughly educated on reasoning for this policy; it is clear that the University has analyzed the benefits to enforcing this rule. Our school is unique in such pointed specialization of studies. In the aerospace, engineering and aviation industry, many top companies are smoke free. Union Pacific, DuPont, Dow, Boeing, Texas Instruments and Sharper Image and others have tobacco-free policies. Why would we allow our students to blindly enter fields carrying blunt detrimental habits [pun intended]? I defend our stance with facts, devoid of my personal opinion. It would make sense for STEM-focused careers to take such a stance: smoking has been proven hazardous to both active smokers and non-smokers through secondhand smoke. On both college campuses and in the workplace, smoke is a common allergen and just particle of ash on clothing and nearby material can irritate others. Cigarettes smell foul and can be offensive to others who may need to share facilities with smokers.

Thinking about the specifics of how my explanation will resonate with the students in important to gaining understanding. As Nosich states in his appeal to being precise, I flex from general to specific reasoning for an institutions actions for making policy. College and work environments save money as smoke-free facilities. Maintenance costs go down when companies do not have to worry about cigarette butts, matches and ash on their premises. When a long-term smoking employee or housing resident leaves, their office may smell of tobacco, and companies need to spend more time and money cleaning (and possibly replacing) this furniture. They also do not have to provide separate receptacles for smokers to dispose of their butts. Where the likelihood of an accidental fire and spread is high, a policy prohibiting smoking avoids costly damage to the community as a whole. Life and health insurance usually ask if employees are smokers. Smokers have higher policy rates than non-smokers. In both the classroom, residence hall, meeting room and bathroom, those who smoke may be stereotyped as unhealthy, unclean or unsympathetic to those who they expose their irritants.
We protect our students and staff from health problems, protect the facilities from unnecessary wear and damage, and lower operation costs, which directly benefits students. No one wants tuition to rise.This conjecture of thought appeals to the average student's (an consumer's) non-critical thinking standards - appealing to personal benefit. I also appeal to the circumstances that are attention getting. Imagine the millions of dollars in planes alone that could go up in smoke by someone failing to put out a smoldering tobacco product! This example is particularly relevant to the Prescott campus, as only a little more than a year ago, a forest fire occurred across the street from campus, killing 19 firefighters.
My job is to teach outside of the classroom, the decorum needed to function as a member of society, as a leader and as an employee. Being reasonable to complaints about why policy is as it stands allows me to see where the complaints the students make originate from while also seeing the usefulness of such policies. Being logical allows me to convince them that they policies that may land them in my office today may allow them to keep their dream job (and good health) in the future. Exercising effectiveness notes that I will be clear in my purpose; I will not waste a student’s time with telling them information that is not relevant to them and their future. Though students may not always want to hear what I have to say, my job is to successfully represent the purpose and mission of the university, which is to retain our students until they complete a degree program, and disperse competent STEM leaders out into their chosen career field.

References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010). Implementing a  Tobacco-Free Campus Initiative   in Your  Workplace. Reviewed at      www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/hwi/toolkits/tobacco/index.htm

Suskie, L. (2004). Assessing student learning: A common sense  guide. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. 

Nosich, G. (2012). Learning to Think Things Through.  Boston,  MA:  Pearson Education, Inc.

US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease  Control and Prevention (2005).     CDC Tobacco-free Campus  Policy. Reviewed at      
 www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/hwi/downloads/CDC_tobacco_polic  y.pdf

Intellectual Perseverance

Intellectual Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight.

This definition of intellectual perseverance leaves me with many questions. Am I capable of separating fact from belief? I would assume that as a person with a background in journalism, the answer should be clear. I have been formally trained to keep a discerning eye and to realize the objective and subjective portions of conversation and thought. But is this true of even the most prevalent and professional media? Are FOX, MSNBC, CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera all highlighting the same stories? Are they all deemed fair and balanced? Do they report without bias, without a modus operandi? I struggle to say that I view each outlet as equal to the others. I watch each with a different set of glasses. I regard BBC as the least bias on American issues. I am quite critical of FOX News, as I find their reports quite slanted toward the conservative, 1950s heyday American. I appreciate Al Jazeera’s focus on G8 influence in the Middle East, as I believe “truth is on the side of the oppressed,” as Civil Right-era leader Malcolm X noted.

The declaration to “firm adherence to rational principles” against an apparent ignorant and irrational public seems unattainable. Perhaps I need to ask myself: What is a rational principle? The Free Dictionary states rational as “Having or exercising the ability to reason,” or to be “Of sound mind; sane.” I wonder, if the example given, “man is a rational being” is true statement.  Our macro actions, then, should show that we are rational. Is war rational? In this country alone, I see us split. According to a 2006 CNN poll, sixty percent of Americans opposed the U.S. war in Iraq. Perhaps if we described the action in detail without using such a general word, we would sway opinion on its legitimacy. Is the act of slaughtering foreign (and at times, domestic) strangers to solve issues that no one fighting caused, which drains tax dollars from education and social security, a concrete route to peace and a stable economy?

What about abortion? A 2014 Gallup poll states Americans are split on this issue: 47% are pro-choice, 46% are pro-life. Is it better to be a defender of a woman, or a potential life? Or is it all semantics for murder? Is pro-life the same as anti-woman? How does the wording of an issue affect where we stand on it? How does one find the rational answer of what is right and wrong on an issue with so many passionate arguers?

According to Sir Karl Popper, an Austrian-British philosopher and professor at the London School of Economics (regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century) his 'principle of rationality' empirically bare and untrue in the social arena, but even so, useful. Popper was applying his theory to natural science, but then segments social science into how scientists or social scientists (which I would argue, all leaders are) understand and solve issues. Popper states “there is only one way of learning to understand a problem… and that is to try to solve it and fail.”

Then intellectual perseverance must be the ability to seek the facts, build a grand defense for one’s argument, presenting not only the information which supports your reasoning, but the reasoning against your stance. It also involves expressing your biases before your conversational adversary does, and accounting for why your research is devoid influence from your personal biases. This complex process directly ties back to a leading researcher in critical thinking, Richard Paul, who stated that “critical thinking is thinking about your thinking while you're thinking in order to make your thinking better.” How does one think about their think while in conversation? I suppose I have always attempted to filter my replies and defenses with listening to the entire complaint or argument or the other(s), questioning how my defense of opinion may be perceived due to a plethora of traits. I often question how passionate or invested I should be into conversation which directly affects my being. I am passionate about women’s, minority and religious issues because I am a multicultural woman from a non-Christian background in America. I feel far more comfortable in discussion about minority groups I do not represent, because I feel that others will see me as less-invested in issues involving other minority groups because I think they assume I am only interested in defending “my groups;” however, I see all minority groups (as equally-yoked in defensibility.

So again I ask myself: What is Intellectual Perseverance? Perhaps it is the ability to be vigilant of the inherent biases in ourselves and in others, and the realization that one’s truth may not align with reality, while also noting that our reality may not be identical to others.

References

CNN.com (2006). Poll: 60 percent of Americans oppose Iraq war. Retrieved from            http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/09/iraq.poll/ 

Foundation for Critical Thinking (September 2014). Valuable Intellectual Virtues. Retrieved  from www.criticalthinking.org

Houghton Mifflin Company (2009). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English  Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rational

Nosich, Gerald (2011). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking  Across the Curriculum (pp. 1-2)

Popper, Karl (1994). The myth of framework (pp. 154-158). London: Routledge.

Saad, Lydia (2014). U.S. Still Split on Abortion: 47% Pro-Choice, 46% Pro-Life. Retrieved  from http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx