A500.9.4.RB_MedleyKim In Just Nine Weeks

     As I take a deep breath and look back, the past nine weeks have been a wonderful journey on my path to my Masters of Science degree. In looking at the titles of future courses, I can see why a solid foundation either needs to be formed or strengthened before taking the plunge. The primary value of this course, for me, is the opportunity for reflection. It has been a consistent theme throughout the duration. Whether the assignment was to review and discuss, or research and present, the element of reflection remained as a constant; and, that will be a key element for not only the next few years; but, for continued success beyond the online world of Embry Riddle.

     Positive experiences far outnumber any negatives. The few areas of frustration I experienced were those from the introduction of new technologies. Quite honestly, my OCD plays a huge part with my aggravations. You see, sometimes I do not allow myself the luxury of patience. I easily become disappointed when I cannot master a new program within some arbitrary time frame I have established. This course gave me the chance to take a deeper look inside and I now realize I have been allowing many of those vices to creep in and not only hinder my own curiosity; they have often challenged my courage and resolve to master a new skill. Prior to this course, I had not heard of “The Brain” or “Camtasia”. Perhaps an earlier introduction of the presentation resources, with a few practice lessons, would help alleviate future frustrations. Nonetheless, I persevered and was able to produce a presentation for "Admission & Acceptance Through Curiosity & Courage". Did I mention, Google Drive, yet an additional source for new learning, saved my life and my project submission? That’s a topic for another discussion. Another area of questioning came with proper APA citations. The only way to correct this is to have it not only introduced by the English department of undergraduate schools; but, to have consistency with grading the formatting. Again, that’s the OCD in me. I simply do not like losing points due to technicalities.

  

     My favorite assignments are those that involve writing. For many years, I was always instructed to write in third person fashion. It is not easy to break this habit; however, I enjoy writing from a personal perspective, especially when asked to apply a concept. It provides me with a chance to create a visual image with words in an effort to support my ideas and concepts. I enjoyed the video presentations, too; and, was completely fascinated with the TED video from week eight. Statistics bore me to tears; but, Mr. Rosling’s historical tales and animated charts actually made dots and data come to life. I can only hope to be able to capture and hold an audience’s attention as he did.

     Looking ahead, I am going to slow the swirl a bit more and exercise more patience with myself so as to possibly avoid, or at least overcome those feelings of disappointment and fatigue when faced with a seemingly daunting challenge. I think I am making progress as just this week; I was able to re-take a test that led me to question intellectual curiosity and courage. I am happy to say my test scores increased; and, for a self-recognized grade weenie, that’s an excellent measure for the overall success and experience gained from this course. 

A500.8.3.RB_MedleyKim_Lessons Learned

            Talk about a lesson in one’s own topic of research! This week presented me with several hurdles in order to develop, produce, and deliver a visual presentation of my action research, “Admission & Acceptance Through Curiosity & Courage”. Typing the paper was easier than making the movie. My week began with the assigned readings. Much to my chagrin, I learned one of my favorite programs, PowerPoint, is now considered passé in the world of presentation programs. I was challenged to step outside of my comfort zone and use a newer program in order to present my paper to enquiring minds. As with any assignment, I began with research.

            I went to the sites for SnagIt, Jing, Screencast, Screencast-O-Matic, Voicethread, Morae, and Camtasia. It was like the day when eight track and cassette players were replaced by the Walkman. I haven’t even made the leap to MP3 players! I felt like a fish out water and my head was swimming from the virtual overload of the latest tech devices designed to capture the audience’s attention. Quite honestly, I am not exactly certain if I buy the notion of high-tech equals high attention span; nonetheless, I pressed on. Paul Harvey would be proud. Most of the programs provide the ability to control the content and present it in a way that avoids the pitfalls outlined in Reynolds’ (n.d.) “Presentation Zen…” and “The Big Four…”. However, when you come from a generation where the overhead projector was the machine to have for presentations, all of the programs seem quite ominous. I had initially decided to use Prezi. Why? My teenage son uses it for his school presentations and I remember watching him put a presentation together. It looked relatively easy to navigate; and, if I needed assistance, I could call on him. What’s the saying? If you need to know how to work any piece of electronics, call a teenager. As I read about Prezi, it was not clear if I could add audio. Since this was a requirement, I wanted to select a program that would provide both video and audio options. That is why I chose Camtasia. I truly believe God never asks us to do any more than He knows we can handle. This was certainly tested this week.

            Thursday morning was the first day of operation action research project, the movie. I watched the tutorials, re-visited the dos and don’ts of presentations, began to learn my way around the program; and, by early evening, I had completed the first opening segments of my presentation. I used the rest of the night to go through my paper to identify the pieces of information I felt were important to present. Thank God for Google and the many photos accessible with a few keystrokes. I was able to match verbal concepts with visuals. In the back of my mind, I tried to remember all of the bad presentations I had attended. I wanted there to be a sense of entertainment sprinkled with a bit of knowledge that would hopefully leave the audience asking questions and willing to go in search of the answers. By late Saturday afternoon, I had finished and uploaded the link for grading. I thought all was well; but, I forgot God has a sense of humor.

            Sunday morning quickly turned into a panic zone for me. My instructor could not open my Camtasia project. For more than three hours, I tried all I knew to upload the project to YouTube, attach it to The Brain, and zip, and unzip the file. I cannot tell you how much I was longing for the days of PowerPoint. I was so frustrated, typing this reflective blog was not even a consideration. Trust me, no one would have wanted to read the words I was thinking earlier today. Again, thank God for Google, specifically, Google Drive. This new program also allows me to share the project with Google Drive in addition to YouTube. Since the video was too long for YouTube, I tried Google Drive. The rest, as they say, is history. My professor was able to access the video, and I passed the assignment.

            So, what is the moral of the story? Patience is definitely a virtue; and, just a St. Thomas Aquinas explained, it countered the initial disappointment I felt while pursuing this new path of curiosity. Likewise, the fatigue I experienced while trying to force this new notion, PowerPoint is passé, was alleviated with perseverance, my constant pursuit of uploading the project stopped me from abandoning the quest, and, finally, the pusillanimity I was feeling was quelled with generosity from a patient professor. Anxieties aside, I will commit these lessons to memory and be a bit more receptive to trying to ways to present information. There are still a few things I need to learn about Camtasia; but, I can see how it does make a presentation more personal and unique, which I welcome. 

A500.7.3.RB_MedleyKim_Quantitative Reflections

            According to Tero Mamia (n.d.), whereas qualitative research attempts to answer the question “how”; quantitative research takes regularities and patterns that take place in society, assigns numbers to such occurrences, studies those numbers with statistical formulas, and attempts to answer the question “why”. A study, conducted by Judge, Ilies, Bono, and Gerhardt (2002), applied both qualitative and quantitative methods to provide a more consistent framework for measuring personality traits often associated with leadership. They contend a level of skepticism, regarding the correlation between personality traits and leadership, had been noted since 1948. Judge et al., (2002) used qualitative studies by experts in the field to identify personality traits sustained by at least ten separate studies. With this list, they incorporated the Five-Factor Model of Personality; and, after having developed a meta-analysis formula, they were able to determine a hierarchy of personality traits as they relate to emergent and effective leadership (Judge et al., 2002). Extraversion was the strongest trait while Neuroticism was the weakest (Judge et al., 2002).

            Being naturally curious, my mind began to ask quite a few questions with regards to my action research paper. If I had more time to research curiosity and courage, it would be interesting to develop a similar protocol to test which personality traits would emerge as the strongest and the weakest for curiosity and courage. I can imagine scouring prior qualitative reviews from experts in the field of curiosity and courage. From that endeavor, I would form a table just as Judge et al. (2002) did. From this, I would narrow the list to a manageable one for quantitative research. Based on the methods used by Judge et al. (2002), I could rely on the Five-Factor Model to begin to identify those personality traits most associated with curiosity and courage, as well as those that fail to register any response. Would there also be a correlation with leadership? Are leaders curious? Do they have higher levels of curiosity? Are they more intellectually courageous than other people? The possibilities are quite intriguing to say the least.

            As Mamia (n.d.) notes, quantitative research presents both strengths and weaknesses. Numbers provide a relatively easy method for describing change within a unit and across various units. Perhaps a curiosity and courage study would indicate women are 50% more curious than men; but, men are three times as likely to admit to being wrong than women. While this presentation ascribes tangible numbers, over simplification of curiosity and its correlation with courage becomes a concern for researchers. Questions such as when are women more curious than men and under what circumstances will men admit to being wrong are perhaps better addressed with a qualitative approach. Numbers are numbers. They are black and white figures, whereas human observations take place in living color.

            Of the top five traits identified by Judge et al. (2002), I would imagine Openness to Experience would demonstrate the strongest correlation to curiosity with Neuroticism being the weakest. With courage, I would expect to see Agreeableness as the strong correlation with courage. According to Judge et al. (2002), affiliation is linked to Agreeableness and the “need for affiliation” has a negative correlation with leadership. Could this be an explanation as to why leaders exhibit intellectual courage? Since leaders are not focused on affiliations, are they more able to admit to wrongly held beliefs and accept new information? Neuroticism would also be the weakest for courage. Having this particular study as a reference point has only led to more questions for this curious future leader.

             

A500.5.3.RB_MedleyKim_Critical Thinking About Critical Thinking

     As I look at the topic for this week’s blog, I am reminded of a song by Kenny Rogers, when he was still with the group, The First Edition. The song, “Just Dropped In”, contains a well-known; but, often forgotten chorus, “I just dropped in to see what condition my condition was is”. That line sums how I am feeling about today’s topic, “critical thinking about critical thinking”. Instead of pushing my soul into a “deep dark hole” and chasing it down the rabbit hole; I write about my thought process and have even parked many of those thoughts in The Brain, software specifically designed to organize thoughts. Now, if only my brain can master The Brain.

     I thought it appropriate to take a look at the thoughts I mapped out during week three. The four areas of focus I listed are based on Nosich’s (2012) findings and include developing a better understanding, stopping the swirl, questioning, applying the eight elements, becoming more disciplined, setting standards; and, as always, practice, practice, practice. Of these thoughts, the application of the eight elements and setting standards are those that are changing. Perhaps this is due in part because of the annotated bibliography assignment and the quest to find not only credible source of information; but, information that will add credence to the action research project currently in process.

     I am naturally curious, so asking questions about articles comes easily. Courage is a bit more difficult as there is always a temptation to capture the first few writings about a particular subject and later attempt to make the research match the area of study. The circle of reasoning and the application of the eight elements helps me to go around the circle, look at each wedge of reasoning, and not only internalize those steps; but, use them in the here and now in order to put together an effective presentation. The QEDS, outlined by Nosich (2012), act as blinders for me and help me focus on the topic, which asks the question, how easy is it to admit wrong with long-held beliefs, and if curiosity sent us in search of information to satisfy a stimulation, why then can we not accept the new belief? Is there an element of or a tipping point for curiosity that inhibits our courage?

     One of my favorite prayers which help me to slow the swirl so that I can absorb and reflect upon new information is the “Serenity Prayer”. These few lines of verse were plastered on a host of retail products during the 70s. Rather than rely on my memory, the following captures the prayer:

Figure 1. Serenity Prayer – Behiel (2014).

As it applies to critical thinking, the prayer, at least for me, is a way to continually seek and accept curiosity so that I may question why things cannot be changed, courage to change and to not change things; and finally, wisdom to understand the difference.

     Nosich (2012) states we may never acquire all of the intellectual traits that lead to the pinnacle of critical thinking. Do I have the courage to accept that and if not; what other avenues of curiosity can I follow to the top of that pinnacle? At times, the current state of my critical thinking seems as foreign as a psychedelic Kenny Rogers questioning the condition of his condition. More often than not, it is a one that finds me at peace with its current state while in search of methodologies that lead to internal changes for future applications.