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. 

A500.7.3.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.