Standardization - May 2012 Issue

http://iq.callme.io/2011/04/18/9-call-center-metrics-that-can-lead-to-operational-success/

In light of AP tests coming up for high school students as well as the ACT test which was just recently administered, I’ve been thinking about the entire concept behind standardized tests. Why is it that we, as humans and intellectuals, want to standardize everything? We have units of weight, volume, distance, rank, rating, degree, etc. It’s interesting to think about because we, on an individual scale, appreciate that which can be defined and are fascinated with the abstract and theoretical. I personally believe that the reason that we choose to define and categorize things is so that we can venture closer towards the known and allow ourselves some lead way to explore the unknown.

Galileo once stated that “all truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” What I think this quote means is that the easiest things in life to comprehend are those which have already been calculated, measured, scripted, recorded, etc. In an essence, they are what we already know. The only difference is that they are manipulated in various ways to reveal newer utilities. But let’s look back at the topic, standardizing. We can see standards set up everywhere: personal ideals, societal norms, job requirements, test scores, international comparative values, the list is essentially endless.

In regards to test scores, going back to the inspiration behind today’s discussion, we can see how they are applied in everyday life. The SAT’s represent an individual’s ability or likelihood of succeeding at the college or university level, the PISA works to rank countries using a standardized test, the AIMS in Arizona works as a benchmark to determine the level of academic performance of students in Arizona; we live in a world that has been simplified by experiment and metrics. But the importance of this measurement of education cannot be stressed enough; it serves to compare, using quantifiable values, the progress of educational techniques and decisions. This allows strategists to compare the techniques used with the output – scores on the tests which correlate to achievement and attainment in an academic field. This comparison can then be projected to an international scale, demonstrating what we see as the world rankings in terms of math skills, comprehensive reading, and writing abilities. 

I have personally never seen many instances in which a standard was not applied; that which is above standards is viewed as extraordinary and exceeding expectations while that which falls below the line is deemed sub-par quality. When we turn our attention to societal norms, we can see the application of standards that we subconsciously adhere to. It is standard that when someone places their hand forward, you shake it, if someone sneezes, you say “bless you,” if someone offers you something, it’s common courtesy to deny it humbly and accept it if the person insists that you take it. We choose to follow these norms because society frowns upon those who choose not to abide by them; anyone who differs from the actions that the general public is participating in is seen as odd, and therefore a deterrent and an unproductive burden that society must correct.

Lastly, if we notice that standards are also employed in the working/career field, we can notice the true value behind them. Imaging someone in the situation where they have to rely on someone else for a service. It essentially becomes a matter of security and efficiency at that point: Can I trust person X to perform the task that I need them to efficiently and properly? In a world that is bent towards producing the most and the best, the fastest and in the greatest quantity, standards must be employed in order to maximize output. As populations escalate at a greater rate, we require larger amounts of services in the health care industry, agriculture fields, consumer services, computers etc.

In an essence, standards are literally our way of living. We require guidelines to base decisions and actions off of. These standards become our daily routines, our study habits, our goals. Until next time, think about how life would be if one standard were to change that would cause your schedule to accommodate that change.

Mindset Obstacle Course - April 2012 Issue

http://thecountryshrink.wordpress.com/2010/05/04/putting-the-puzzle-together-in-psychotherapy/

Thomas Jefferson once proclaimed that “nothing can stop the man with the right mindset from achieving his goals. Nothing on Earth can help the man with the wrong mindset.” The tenor behind this extract seems simple enough: one who wishes to achieve something need only put their mind to it. Clearly this seems to concur with Henry ford’s memorable saying, “whether you think you can or can’t, you’re right.” However, thing’s are often easier said than done. But why is that? Why is it that we can tell ourselves what we need to have done, envision every possible outcome or repercussion that could subsequently occur as a result of any taken action, but we cannot put words into action? It seems like an interesting topic to orient our discussion today around, mostly because it is a very relatable topic.

The idea behind self-imposed barriers is one that is often met with much criticism; few wish to acknowledge that the thing keeping them from their desires is themselves. And again, it must be recognized that everyone experiences the drawbacks of a self-imposed barrier, as everyone has dealt with the difficulties of grasping the fruits of their strenuous activity. What is this self-imposed barrier though? I think it’s that innate thought process in everyone’s mind that convinces their person that taking a “safer” and “inactive” approach is the most convenient method of avoiding failure.

 Now interestingly enough, Harvard University recently announced its contribution to the career options available to people: the analytic leader. They state that “these are people who are facile with data, strong analytically, and who know how to think about problem solving.” What is the link between these analytic leaders and the self-imposed barriers? I personally believe it to be that these analysts are qualified for their respective careers BECAUSE they are able to surpass their own self-imposed barriers. Now step back and examine what makes this career path so prestigious and honorable; it’s the fact that these individuals are specifically trained and oriented to either solve or circumlocute a problem.

Then comes the issue of a person being unable to define themselves, their strengths, their weaknesses, and their objectives. This is an entirely different outlook for this same theme because in the first branch, we acknowledged that a person knows what they want, they are just simply unable to obtain it. In this second analysis, the person is at a loss because they are unable to decipher what they truly desire primarily. There are certain characters that can generally state what they “want,” or what they wish to happen; however, there is usually no concrete plan or guideline to follow with this end. The individual may claim that they want fame, wealth, prosperity, health, wisdom, success, or any other sought after virtue, yet once inquired to explain more, they fall lax in their response.

Further expansion of this topic is the inability to assess oneself. This topic is controversial because few are tolerant enough to hear that they may not know themselves as well as they feel they do. This person is unable to determine their skills and talents, thus they fail to expound on those areas of adroit action. This puts the person below their ability to succeed, which could subsequently cause a loss of motivation, determination, confidence in own skills, decline in presentation, or even overall desensitization to the success of others. Conversely is the negative effect of being unable to determine one’s own weaknesses. This can potentially lead to a heightened feeling of self ability or worth. Both of these are difficult to cope with because only the ends are certain, yet there is often never a plan decided in order to achieve that end.

In the end, I leave you with these varying viewpoints on why people have difficulty achieving their goals. Some individuals fear the possibility of failure, and thus resolve to never try. Others may exhibit overly heightened of depressed self esteems; this would cause them to either over reach their true abilities and venture into territory which is not within the scope of the person, or on the other end, a lower self esteem could simply tell people to give up trying. What methods do you use to achieve your goals? Do you rely on the motivation of others or do you follow a more introvert method? It’s all in the mindset.

Citizenry - March 2012 Issue

http://webpub.allegheny.edu/employee/I/iroy/weblogfa2010/global_citizenship/

This past month, I went to a national debate tournament at Harvard Square in Massachusetts. I was surrounded by history, a joint of colonial and modern architecture, and plenty of activity. I was walking through a neighborhood of Victorian homes, when I got to thinking about my debate topic: Birthright citizenship would be abolished in the United States. One of my major arguments in support of maintaining birthright citizenship was that it upheld American Ideals. Now this is where things get interesting. What defines American ideals? What are they? It’s an interesting topic to think about because it’s so arbitrary and abstract that a concrete representation of these “ideals” manifests itself in theory entirely. Through my long, introspective walk, I was able to narrow down the list to a couple essential “American Ideals” which were: equality, representation, and mobility.

Equality can be broken down into several categories, such as equality of opportunity, gender equality, racial equality, and many more. Equality of opportunity is very controversial because often enough, people feel as though their abilities are infringed upon; the government is restricting their ability to pursue aspects of life such as higher education, the ability to vote, or even work. Equality is vital in the United States, it’s ubiquity in every household is one of the foundational bases on which the Constitution was drafted. Equality is crucial to a progressive and democratic America, as it provides every constituent with an even playing field on which they may be represented by their government; this is a theory known as the social contract.

The social contract, created by John Locke, is the theoretical basis of the American government. It states that there is a compromise made between the constituents and the government; the people sacrifice some freedom for protection from themselves through a third party – the government – and the government is obligated above all else to protect its constituents and represent them diplomatically and civilly. Then comes the interesting topic of tacit consent; no one can be forced into submission – if someone doesn’t want to become a citizen, then they should not be forced into the title. Birthright citizenship, going back to the primer in this discussion, is important in upholding the social contract because it gives people the ability to not only exercise equality, but also to expand and engage in social and economic mobility.

Arguably, one of the greatest benefits of being an American citizen is that a person is able to engage in social and economic mobility. Social and economic mobility grants a person the ability to work to earn an income, and income which is not regulated by the government, nor is it limited by any faction. This allows for income classes to grow and expand. However, this provides the counterargument of the rising income disparities and the “negative” impacts they have on society. It’s a very partisan issue, because on one side is the argument that validates rising income disparities because they are the result of capitalism, while on the other end is the argument that income disparities are causing decreased democratic representation.

What do you think? After analyzing the transition from birthright citizenship and its link to income disparities, is it possible that birth right citizenship is granting too many opportunities to the “anchor babies?” Or perhaps, as justified by the Social Contract Theory, it is the governments duty to provide these benefits to all of its constituents?

People vs. Nature - February 2012 Issue



https://www.123rf.com/photo_13067264

People often forget their role in life. This is not to say that people are unable to acknowledge themselves; many however, simply cannot find their place. In tandem with this discussion about self-acknowledgement, I’d also like to propose another interesting topic: our role in the natural world. First off, it’s important to define what “natural” means. But then we run into a problem, we can’t! This is not to say that there isn’t an Oxford English Dictionary definition or even a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy dictation; it is to say, however, than any definitive analogue will be misconstrued, as it was created by us human beings. Now this may be considered a radical though, but if this is to be considered extreme, then it is only fair to assume the antithesis of my argument to be bigoted as well.

I believe that humans are part of the natural system; we live in ecosystems, we function in communities, we have a population that is ever-expanding and that is limited by external/internal factors, we communicate our needs, and we affect that which surrounds us. Given this understanding, it seems obvious that we are indeed part of “nature.” We humans are no different than the environment around u, as we build our own homes from materials of the earth, our cities are our ecosystems, our farms are our food source, and we even work to establish our fitness. This view is often concealed behind the guise of the corporate man in a suit (which do not grow on trees), wearing his polished leather shoes (also not found in “nature”), who brandishes a laptop in one hand and a ballpoint pen in the other.

In order to see how humans are part of nature, I find that a comparison to something that we already consider to be natural is in order, for example, a beaver. A beaver manipulates its environment to build its home – it chews down trees and blocks rivers. How is this different from what we humans do? We also use our environment to create shelters – which are continuously being developed and maintained through manipulation of the environment. Then let’s look at how the animal keeps itself nourished and maintained. Many food items, even in“nature,” require preparation of some kind. Granted that you won’t see a tiger grilling steal or a rabbit tossing a salad, the gist of the concept is similar. We prepare food so that we may consume it, as such; animals prepare their food by cracking it open, mashing it, or crafting it through some other process. In this sense, not only do we manipulate our environments in similar fashions, but we also maintain ourselves in the same technique.

However, this polar to this argument is that humans are not a part of nature because we, as some religions state, were given control of all flora and fauna, thus we are “above”our kingdom of subservient foliage and beast alike. And what about the computer age? What about industrialization? What about pollution? All are byproducts of human/natural life. Pollution is a naturally occurring phenomenon, yet what drives critics of human pollution is the fact that it’s been so augmented as to be the cause of mass extinction and global warming, that it is forgotten that it just simply happens.

Understanding that humans play a role in nature is also key to understanding oneself. Acknowledging oneself is something that very few can achieve, granting it such hi prestige and reverence. A question until next time: Where do you find your position is in everyday life? Are you a provider? A supporter? A leader? It’s an interesting transition from a discussion about nature to oneself, but it’s also interesting to see how oneself fits into nature.

Culture - January 2012 Issue

http://rw-3.com/2010/01/culture-defined/

What is culture? Is it our background? Perhaps it’s what defines us, our character, our family, our values, our morals, our virtues, our perceptions. Or maybe, quite simply, it’s all of the above? Recently, I was talking with several of my close friends, and we were discussing the languages we spoke, where we came from, what we had planned for the weekend. It dawned upon me, that at that moment, I was falling behind. It wasn’t just a small jolt, it was a huge epiphany. I didn’t want to be the one that let my culture die, my language fade, my traditions cease. I made a promise to myself at that moment that I would only talk in my native tongue at home so that I would be fluent in it. Until now, I’ve focused mainly on language and tradition, yet culture can also encompass other issues, such as celebrations, holidays, memorials, or even the day-to-day activities that we blissfully ignore.

At this point, I’d like to propose the question: “is our youth losing culture?” Such a simple question, yet it is guaranteed to have polar responses. Some will inevitably state that our youth is; our youth is participating less in cultural events, our youth is losing the language, our youth is avoiding national history. Equally as likely is the retaliation of: No, because our youth is being bombarded with even more information and obligations than the generation prior to ours; our youth today actively participates in the opportunities provided to us, is required to learn a foreign language (in some schools), and even so, still opts to learn about national history. I, like many other Asian students, am a first generation in the United States; my mother and father were both born and raised in India or another Asian nation. However, if we look back at our perceived definition of culture, I feel as though I’m not necessarily falling behind in culture.

Our background: My background is rooted in the United States – no denying that – yet I also have picked up my language, heard my family history, read/picked up on the history of my country, and I even partake in religious and festive practices. Our character: Growing up with parents who themselves had lived in a different environment is difficult, yet I think that it still allows for me to understand the morals and values associated with their upbringing, as well as my own. Lastly, I feel as if it’s important to realize a growing secular outlook towards the world. Globalization, by definition, has brought every country together, thus every culture has some connection with another. Realizing this will also allow you to recognize that culture is ever-expanding and overarching.

I was watching television the other day, when I noticed something that I would have otherwise dismissed. On an Indian show channel, the show was advertising their Christmas special. Now for us living in the United States, this isn’t of much importance; however, it also furthers my point that cultures are growing more and more together. India is recognizing Christmas as a unique and large scale event. Although they may use it for lucrative purposes, it still demonstrates a growing interconnectedness between cultures. Now let us examine the culture debate from the perspective of the parents or previous generation.

They feel as though there is a lack in cultural outlook or participation because, perhaps, it is significantly less than the environment in which the previous generation was reared in. Because the environments are different, the discrepancies in the cultural community are augmented to the point where it seems to be a complete loss of tradition as an entity. This entity, as it seems to parents, has been replaced by the “white-washed” and “westernized” community in which the next generation has been brought up in. Strangely enough, and I may be alone in this radical concept, but this is PERFECTLY NATURAL. People pick up what is around them. If this wasn’t true, then language would never have been transposed across gaps and through the ages, memories would never be recalled, nothing could ever advance.

I’d like to round this month’s article up by summarizing my essential speech. I feel that, although there are two solid sides to this argument, there is a large area of consensus that both “sides” have deemed as uninhabitable territory of compromise. What many people fail to acknowledge is that there isn’t a lack of “culture” as a whole, rather, a lack of culture that one WISHES to see in another. People cannot escape their surroundings, regardless of how hard they try. It’s one of the few things that parents itself to the mind and body throughout life, lethargic to place, time, age, gender, religion, ethnic orientation, etc. On that note, I hope everyone had an engaging break from work and school and I hope everyone has a great rest of the holidays!

Communication - December 2011 Issue



http://aspanational.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/is-effective-communication-a-casualty-of-todays-contention/

Communication is an essential part of our everyday lives. We use it in phone conversations, public chats, SMS, and face-to-face oral articulation. However, what are little known to most people are the origins of language and terms. For example, the commonly used phrase “good bye,” was derived from “god bye,” which originated from “God be with you.” Simple lingual phrases are in common application all around us, but we, as people, are blissfully unaware of what they truly mean. Some believe it’s due to our lack of concern or indifference to learn the deeper meaning of anything. I personally believe it is because we are content with skimming texts and languages to the point where we are able to use it, without having to truly understand what it actually means. We “don’t find the time” to discover what it is that we are actually saying, so long as we are able to say it.

A classic example of this can be alluded to in Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave.” The story starts out by detailing the lives of the ignorant, the indifferent, those who are limited in their capacity to comprehend that which is greater than them. These men and women are shackled into place in their cave, with nothing to see but the shadows projected onto the wall in front of them. These shadows are projected here from behind them, where a fire burns to provide the light, and where men and women from outside the cave, the enlightened, attempt to show the ignorant the world outside their own. These men and women, being shackled in place, know nothing of the world outside their humble and content inducing cave, aside from the mirage and shady images of the shadows in front of them.

However, occasionally, one man will be released from his shackles by the enlightened, be led out of the darkness, and allowed to witness the deeper and more intuitive thought process and functionality of life as it truly is. Upon seeing the sun for the first time, the man would understandably experience fright and bewilderedness; he will attempt to return back into the safety of the cave to escape the light. However, his interest has been toyed with, and he will slowly inch back out of the cave to see the world. Upon doing so, he will come to realize that his world in the cave was a simple puppet show – lack of life, truth, clarity, depth. The man’s vision has now adjusted in proportion to the light outside. Naturally, he will wish to run back and tell his peers, who are still shackled in the cave.

Upon returning, the man’s vision in the dark has been ruined because his eyes have not adapted to the darkness of the cave after just being exposed to the intense light of the sun. The men and women in the cave will laugh at his awkwardness in maneuvering the cave, and will quickly assume that the outside world did nothing but blind the man. Should the man attempt to explain what he saw, the ignorant will dismiss it as being the words of a mad man. Should he remove their chains, they will turn on him, and kill him.

This allegory, although personifying our inner reluctance to change, astutely puts the humanly flaw into perspective. The metaphorical language in the allegory explains how and why men become enlightened, and why others choose to stay in their current disparity of worldly knowledge. The newly enlightened man has developed an acute perspicacity of the world – he, who understands, he who philosophizes. He has developed new introspective habits, and although they provide him with new perceptions of the universe, he is openly ridiculed and put down by his peers.

The truth behind this allegory is that the shackles by which the men are chained in the cave are actually their resistance to what they don’t know – their ignorance. The shadows represent the falsehoods and limitations by which people understand language and communication of the world. The world outside represents the truth, and he who ventures out into it is the philosopher – or in context, the enlightened man about his language. The man’s initial revulsion to the sun’s light is the typical response of the man who is learning the truth – they hesitate before contemplating whether or not they wish to continue. Lastly, upon returning to the cave where the others are chained down, he will attempt to convert them, or recognize the truth. These men, who had spent their entire lives in the cave of half-truths, will naturally resist this transition of thought that someone is attempting to enforce upon them. They may respond with violent backlash, as happened in the case of Socrates, who was driven into poisoning himself.

Although his is a radical response to the truth, it can be conceded to that, what started out as ignorance in language depth can be related back to our overall desire to stay within our own world. I end this by proposing a challenge: Spend an entire day and just be open to everything that comes your way. Try that new restaurant that opened across the street, try eating that sushi with the entire packet of wasabi, go see that movie that everyone is talking about, take a small bit of time to exercise your mind and research your language. Also, see how many times in the day you see something extraordinary and document or remember how you reacted to it. Was it in a mocking attitude towards him or her who was behaving differently? Perhaps you were open and understanding to their behavior? These small tasks can go a long way to leading an enlightened and more knowledgeable life, and it might even surprise you to see the world when you leave your cave.

What is Success? - November 2011 Issue




http://www.gcsd.k12.nj.us/hpps/

The concept behind success is such a volatile topic that there is never a single answer. Some define it as the ability to achieve self fulfillment, while others define it as the way others view a person’s character, social status, career, economic well-being, and even lifestyle foundation. Regardless of how it’s interpreted, everyone strives to achieve “success.” The issue that has arisen is that some individuals feel as if success is beyond their reach. An apple on a branch just barely beyond the yearning hand’s grasp. I personally feel as if this “phenomena” of unachieved success is due to a person’s inability to define success for themselves.

We live in a world, to the dismay of many, which is driven by monetary benefits. Those who are able to establish lucrative means and sustainment for their lives are revered in the eyes of the public. We see such figures as Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Tata company etc., and we notice a commonality between them. That is, all of the afore mentioned were pioneers in their field; they were the initiators for a new line of technology and innovation. Now this is not to suggest that in order to achieve what one defines as “success,” you must become a pioneer in a new frontier – as many competitors in the same business have achieved success on their own standards.

Often people discredit the success of others as a byproduct of external factors, while they define their own accolades through internal factors – “they got that job because the interviewer likes them. I got the job because I’m talented and insightful.” Now it seems as if we have attempted to give this arbitrary and abstract concept of “success” a physical and concrete representation.  Our ability to achieve something, receive a certain score, obtain a job etc., is a definition of our success. Some may define it as such while others, even you, might see success in a different light.

As quoted from an NFL coach: “Success is only success if you bring others along with you.”  At a first glance, it’s easy to see what the coach means. However, a thorough analysis reveals the true difficulties that lie just beyond the quotes deceitful guise. Simple to say, not as such to apply. If you take the example of a traditional high school, it can quickly be seen how this quote, although noble in its intentions to define success, is fundamentally flawed. In a high school, students are labeled with numbers, given a class ranking, and often confined to the company of those within proximity of their peer based hierarchy. Students find themselves secluding themselves from beneficial partnerships knowing the consequence of success on their own behalf would also cause the success of another. This form of animosity, although never explicitly displayed, exists in many competitive students, and in some cases, adults alike.

Success is a difficult topic to grasp mainly because of its vast encompassment of ideals. Some see it as achievement of self sufficiency while others see it as helping others. One group may view it as superiority while others define it as evading inferiority. With so many factors in the world limiting a person’s ability to achieve success, they only need one initiative to push them beyond the steep tip of the mountain to reach the ideals and the felicity on the other end. The final message that I promote: Success is defined by you and no one else. Once you can personally achieve a sense of self fulfillment, you can truly begin to see the values in your ways and how far you’ve come to achieve your goals and accolades.