Re:[tips] Do not pass this by: Seventeen very well-spent minutes with Conrad W

[Richard Hake]

Some subscribers to TIPS and TeachEdPsych might be interested in a 
recent post "Re: Do not pass this by: Seventeen very well-spent 
minutes with Conrad W" [Hake (2010)]. The abstract reads:

**
ABSTRACT: Michael Paul Goldenberg called attention to a video by 
Conrad Wolfram titled: "Teaching kids real math with computers" 
. Jonathan Groves responded:

". . . .Conrad Wolfram. . . . gets to one root of the problem with 
mathematics education: We spend far too much time teaching hand 
computation and too little time on other aspects of problem solving: 
interpreting the problem, setting up a mathematical model for the 
problem, and interpreting the results of the mathematics in light of 
the problem we are trying to solve."

Well said, Jonathan Groves!

Wolfram made two points worth elaborating:

  (1) teaching hand calculation is still useful as a basis for mental 
estimation - see e.g., Mahajan's (2010) "Street-Fighting Mathematics."

  (2) Because of its computational complexity, calculus has 
traditionally been taught very late; but by using computers, calculus 
concepts are "amenable to a much younger age group."

  In my opinion, programs such as Wolfram's "Computer-based Math" 
 and the Kaput Center's (2010) "Math In Motion" 
, if used in K-8, can pave the way for the 
education of ninth graders in the basic ideas of Newtonian mechanics 
- thus facilitating Leon Lederman's (2001) "Physics First."
*

To access the complete 13 kB post please click on .

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the
   Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)






"Above all things we must be aware of what I will call 'inert ideas'
- that is to say, ideas that are merely received into the mind
without being utilized, or tested, or thrown into fresh combinations."
   Alfred North Whitehead (1929, 1967) in "The Aims of Education"

REFERENCES [All URL's shortened by  and accessed on 
10 Dec 2010.]

Hake, R.R. 2010. "Re: Do not pass this by: Seventeen very well-spent 
minutes with Conrad W," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at 
. Post of 10 Dec 2010 14:02:20-0800 to AERA-L 
and Net-Gold.  The abstract and link to the complete post are being 
transmitted to various discussion lists are also online on my blog 
"Hake'sEdStuff" at
 with a provision for comments.

Whitehead, A. N. 1967. "Aims of Education and other essays. " Free 
Press.  Amazon.com information at . First 
published in 1929. Note the "Look Inside" feature.

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7120
or send a blank email to 
leave-7120-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

[tips] Escape conditioning in London

[michael sylvester]

With the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall dodging paint balls,it 
would appear that in the future Charles and Camilla
need avoidance training.
Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester.PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7116
or send a blank email to 
leave-7116-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

[tips] No tax cuts for wealthy text authors.

[michael sylvester]

Should text authors making $250,000 and over be given a tax cut?

Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7115
or send a blank email to 
leave-7115-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

RE: [tips] Scale question

[Stuart McKelvie]

Dear Tipsters,

Further to Scott's interesting posting about single-item scales, here is 
another reference:

Woods, S. A., Hampson, S. E. (2005). Measuring the Big Five with Single Items 
using a Bipolar Response Scale. European Journal of Personality, 19, 373-390.

Their "SIMP" had a mean convergene of r = .61 with longer scales and they 
conclude that it "...balances the demands of brevity versus reliability and 
validity."

Sincerely,

Stuart



___
   "Floreat Labore"

  
"Recti cultus pectora roborant"
  
Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D., Phone: 819 822 9600 x 2402 
Department of Psychology,     Fax: 819 822 9661
Bishop's University,
2600 rue College,
Sherbrooke,
Québec J1M 1Z7,
Canada.
 
E-mail: stuart.mckel...@ubishops.ca (or smcke...@ubishops.ca)

Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page: 
http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy

 Floreat Labore"

 


___




-Original Message-
From: Lilienfeld, Scott O [mailto:slil...@emory.edu] 
Sent: December 10, 2010 12:17 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: RE: [tips] Scale question

Actually, not all single item scales are unreliable.  For example, in the 
personality literature, single items that provide individuals with a clear 
conceptualization of the construct and ask them to implicit aggregate their 
experiences/traits/characteristics across situations (e.g., "Sociable people 
enjoy being with others, are outgoing, and prefer the company of friends to 
being alone. In general, how sociable are you are on a 1-5 scale..?") often 
have adequate reliability and validity, sometimes comparable to those of 
multi-item scales. That may be because they take advantage of a kind of mental 
aggregation across situations that, flawed as it is, still capitalizes on the 
Spearman-Brown formula.  See:

Burish, M. (1984).  Approaches to personality inventory construction: A 
comparison of merits.  American Psychologist, 39, 214-227.



..Scott


Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D.
Professor
Editor, Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice
Department of Psychology, Room 473 Psychology and Interdisciplinary Sciences 
(PAIS)
Emory University
36 Eagle Row
Atlanta, Georgia 30322
slil...@emory.edu
(404) 727-1125

Psychology Today Blog: 
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-skeptical-psychologist

50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology:
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-140513111X.html

Scientific American Mind: Facts and Fictions in Mental Health Column:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciammind/

The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and 
his play,
his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his 
recreation,
his love and his intellectual passions.  He hardly knows which is which.
He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does,
leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing.
To him - he is always doing both.

- Zen Buddhist text
  (slightly modified)





-Original Message-
From: Michael Britt [mailto:mich...@thepsychfiles.com]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 11:43 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Scale question

Good points Jim.  I have to agree with the concern over using just one item to 
measure degree of discounting.  Also good point about how you might not want to 
use a negative number in cases like measuring happiness.  Thanks.


Michael Britt
mich...@thepsychfiles.com
http://www.ThePsychFiles.com
Twitter: mbritt




On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Jim Clark wrote:

> Hi
>
> I  cannot answer why the difference between the two scales, although it has 
> been shown in a number of domains that bipolar scales (- to +) produce 
> different distributions of responses than unipolar scales (0/1 to #).  One 
> area is happiness, I believe.  People are less likely to use below-average 
> ratings with bipolar scales, presumably because the negative implies 
> unhappiness rather than simply absence of happiness.  I'm not sure what the 
> situation is for stereotypes and the different scale types.
>
> There are three other problems here that I would wonder about.  First, the 
> scales are seemingly oriented in the opposite direction with low (negative) 
> values indicating belief in the first case and positive values indicating 
> agreement in the second case.  Second, I used the word seemingly because the 
> second scale actually involves the negative "cannot be answered"; hence 
> agreeing with statement indicates skepticism about science and disagreeing 
> indicates pro-science.  Seems to invite some confusion?  Third, are these 
> really single-item scales?  Such

RE: [tips] Scale question

[Lilienfeld, Scott O]

Actually, not all single item scales are unreliable.  For example, in the 
personality literature, single items that provide individuals with a clear 
conceptualization of the construct and ask them to implicit aggregate their 
experiences/traits/characteristics across situations (e.g., "Sociable people 
enjoy being with others, are outgoing, and prefer the company of friends to 
being alone. In general, how sociable are you are on a 1-5 scale..?") often 
have adequate reliability and validity, sometimes comparable to those of 
multi-item scales. That may be because they take advantage of a kind of mental 
aggregation across situations that, flawed as it is, still capitalizes on the 
Spearman-Brown formula.  See:

Burish, M. (1984).  Approaches to personality inventory construction: A 
comparison of merits.  American Psychologist, 39, 214-227.



..Scott


Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D.
Professor
Editor, Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice
Department of Psychology, Room 473 Psychology and Interdisciplinary Sciences 
(PAIS)
Emory University
36 Eagle Row
Atlanta, Georgia 30322
slil...@emory.edu
(404) 727-1125

Psychology Today Blog: 
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-skeptical-psychologist

50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology:
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-140513111X.html

Scientific American Mind: Facts and Fictions in Mental Health Column:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciammind/

The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and 
his play,
his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his 
recreation,
his love and his intellectual passions.  He hardly knows which is which.
He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does,
leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing.
To him - he is always doing both.

- Zen Buddhist text
  (slightly modified)





-Original Message-
From: Michael Britt [mailto:mich...@thepsychfiles.com]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 11:43 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Scale question

Good points Jim.  I have to agree with the concern over using just one item to 
measure degree of discounting.  Also good point about how you might not want to 
use a negative number in cases like measuring happiness.  Thanks.


Michael Britt
mich...@thepsychfiles.com
http://www.ThePsychFiles.com
Twitter: mbritt




On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Jim Clark wrote:

> Hi
>
> I  cannot answer why the difference between the two scales, although it has 
> been shown in a number of domains that bipolar scales (- to +) produce 
> different distributions of responses than unipolar scales (0/1 to #).  One 
> area is happiness, I believe.  People are less likely to use below-average 
> ratings with bipolar scales, presumably because the negative implies 
> unhappiness rather than simply absence of happiness.  I'm not sure what the 
> situation is for stereotypes and the different scale types.
>
> There are three other problems here that I would wonder about.  First, the 
> scales are seemingly oriented in the opposite direction with low (negative) 
> values indicating belief in the first case and positive values indicating 
> agreement in the second case.  Second, I used the word seemingly because the 
> second scale actually involves the negative "cannot be answered"; hence 
> agreeing with statement indicates skepticism about science and disagreeing 
> indicates pro-science.  Seems to invite some confusion?  Third, are these 
> really single-item scales?  Such scales are notoriously unreliable, as 
> demonstrated in the anti-personality debates some years ago.
>
> I haven't read the article, so perhaps these observations are off the mark.
>
> Take care
> Jim
>
> James M. Clark
> Professor of Psychology
> 204-786-9757
> 204-774-4134 Fax
> j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca
>
 Michael Britt  10-Dec-10 9:19:30 AM >>>
> I'm reading Scientific Impotence Excuse article and I'm curious about a 
> measurement procedure I've seen not just here but in other research and I 
> have to say I'm not sure why this is done.
>
> Those familiar with the article (discussed some time back here on TIPS) will 
> know that the researchaers first measured subjects' "endorsement of a 
> societal stereotype".  They did this using a 9 point scale of -4 (strongly 
> believe) to 0 to +4 (strongly disbelieve).
>
> They also later measured the "degree to which participants discounted the 
> results and conclusions of the scientific study".  Here they also used a 9 
> point scale, but this time from 1 (completely disagree that  "this question 
> cannot be answered using scientific methods") to 9 (completely agree that  
> "this question cannot be answered using scientific methods").
>
> Why use a -4 to +4 in one case and 1-9 in another?
>
>
> Michael Britt
> mich...@thepsychfiles.com
> http://www.ThePsychFiles.com
> Twitter: mbritt
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...

Re: [tips] Scale question

[Michael Britt]

Good points Jim.  I have to agree with the concern over using just one item to 
measure degree of discounting.  Also good point about how you might not want to 
use a negative number in cases like measuring happiness.  Thanks.


Michael Britt
mich...@thepsychfiles.com
http://www.ThePsychFiles.com
Twitter: mbritt




On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Jim Clark wrote:

> Hi
> 
> I  cannot answer why the difference between the two scales, although it has 
> been shown in a number of domains that bipolar scales (- to +) produce 
> different distributions of responses than unipolar scales (0/1 to #).  One 
> area is happiness, I believe.  People are less likely to use below-average 
> ratings with bipolar scales, presumably because the negative implies 
> unhappiness rather than simply absence of happiness.  I'm not sure what the 
> situation is for stereotypes and the different scale types.
> 
> There are three other problems here that I would wonder about.  First, the 
> scales are seemingly oriented in the opposite direction with low (negative) 
> values indicating belief in the first case and positive values indicating 
> agreement in the second case.  Second, I used the word seemingly because the 
> second scale actually involves the negative "cannot be answered"; hence 
> agreeing with statement indicates skepticism about science and disagreeing 
> indicates pro-science.  Seems to invite some confusion?  Third, are these 
> really single-item scales?  Such scales are notoriously unreliable, as 
> demonstrated in the anti-personality debates some years ago.
> 
> I haven't read the article, so perhaps these observations are off the mark.
> 
> Take care
> Jim
> 
> James M. Clark
> Professor of Psychology
> 204-786-9757
> 204-774-4134 Fax
> j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca
> 
 Michael Britt  10-Dec-10 9:19:30 AM >>>
> I'm reading Scientific Impotence Excuse article and I'm curious about a 
> measurement procedure I've seen not just here but in other research and I 
> have to say I'm not sure why this is done.  
> 
> Those familiar with the article (discussed some time back here on TIPS) will 
> know that the researchaers first measured subjects' "endorsement of a 
> societal stereotype".  They did this using a 9 point scale of -4 (strongly 
> believe) to 0 to +4 (strongly disbelieve).
> 
> They also later measured the "degree to which participants discounted the 
> results and conclusions of the scientific study".  Here they also used a 9 
> point scale, but this time from 1 (completely disagree that  "this question 
> cannot be answered using scientific methods") to 9 (completely agree that  
> "this question cannot be answered using scientific methods"). 
> 
> Why use a -4 to +4 in one case and 1-9 in another?
> 
> 
> Michael Britt
> mich...@thepsychfiles.com 
> http://www.ThePsychFiles.com 
> Twitter: mbritt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca.
> To unsubscribe click here: 
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=7103
> or send a blank email to 
> leave-7103-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: michael.br...@thepsychfiles.com.
> To unsubscribe click here: 
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13405.0125141592fa9ededc665c55d9958f69&n=T&l=tips&o=7104
> or send a blank email to 
> leave-7104-13405.0125141592fa9ededc665c55d9958...@fsulist.frostburg.edu


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7106
or send a blank email to 
leave-7106-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Re: [tips] Scale question

[Jim Clark]

Hi

I  cannot answer why the difference between the two scales, although it has 
been shown in a number of domains that bipolar scales (- to +) produce 
different distributions of responses than unipolar scales (0/1 to #).  One area 
is happiness, I believe.  People are less likely to use below-average ratings 
with bipolar scales, presumably because the negative implies unhappiness rather 
than simply absence of happiness.  I'm not sure what the situation is for 
stereotypes and the different scale types.

There are three other problems here that I would wonder about.  First, the 
scales are seemingly oriented in the opposite direction with low (negative) 
values indicating belief in the first case and positive values indicating 
agreement in the second case.  Second, I used the word seemingly because the 
second scale actually involves the negative "cannot be answered"; hence 
agreeing with statement indicates skepticism about science and disagreeing 
indicates pro-science.  Seems to invite some confusion?  Third, are these 
really single-item scales?  Such scales are notoriously unreliable, as 
demonstrated in the anti-personality debates some years ago.

I haven't read the article, so perhaps these observations are off the mark.

Take care
Jim

James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca

>>> Michael Britt  10-Dec-10 9:19:30 AM >>>
I'm reading Scientific Impotence Excuse article and I'm curious about a 
measurement procedure I've seen not just here but in other research and I have 
to say I'm not sure why this is done.  

Those familiar with the article (discussed some time back here on TIPS) will 
know that the researchaers first measured subjects' "endorsement of a societal 
stereotype".  They did this using a 9 point scale of -4 (strongly believe) to 0 
to +4 (strongly disbelieve).

They also later measured the "degree to which participants discounted the 
results and conclusions of the scientific study".  Here they also used a 9 
point scale, but this time from 1 (completely disagree that  "this question 
cannot be answered using scientific methods") to 9 (completely agree that  
"this question cannot be answered using scientific methods"). 

Why use a -4 to +4 in one case and 1-9 in another?


Michael Britt
mich...@thepsychfiles.com 
http://www.ThePsychFiles.com 
Twitter: mbritt





---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=7103
or send a blank email to 
leave-7103-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7104
or send a blank email to 
leave-7104-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

[tips] Scale question

[Michael Britt]

I'm reading Scientific Impotence Excuse article and I'm curious about a 
measurement procedure I've seen not just here but in other research and I have 
to say I'm not sure why this is done.  

Those familiar with the article (discussed some time back here on TIPS) will 
know that the researchaers first measured subjects' "endorsement of a societal 
stereotype".  They did this using a 9 point scale of -4 (strongly believe) to 0 
to +4 (strongly disbelieve).

They also later measured the "degree to which participants discounted the 
results and conclusions of the scientific study".  Here they also used a 9 
point scale, but this time from 1 (completely disagree that  "this question 
cannot be answered using scientific methods") to 9 (completely agree that  
"this question cannot be answered using scientific methods"). 

Why use a -4 to +4 in one case and 1-9 in another?


Michael Britt
mich...@thepsychfiles.com
http://www.ThePsychFiles.com
Twitter: mbritt





---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7103
or send a blank email to 
leave-7103-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Re: [tips] Stanford Dissertation Browser

[Michael Smith]

Seems interesting. Of course it depends on what the software is
actually doing, but word overlap doesn't necessarily mean semantic
overlap.

--Mike

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Frantz, Sue  wrote:
>
>
> Interesting Discover blog today:
> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/12/how-close-are-scientific-disciplines.
>
> The author discusses the Stanford Dissertation Browser.
>
> “The Stanford Dissertation Browser is an experimental interface for document
> collections that enables richer interaction than search. Stanford's PhD
> dissertation abstracts from 1993-2008 are presented through the lens of a
> text model that distills high-level similarity and word usage patterns in
> the data. You'll see each Stanford department as a circle, colored by school
> and sized by the number of PhD students graduating from that department.”
>
> http://nlp.stanford.edu/projects/dissertations/browser.html
>
>
>
> Which dissertation abstracts are closest, according to their criteria, to
> the ones produced in psychology?
>
>
>
> Some were unsurprising, such as education, linguistics, psychiatry, and
> neurobiology.
>
>
>
> Others were more surprising, such as electrical engineering and geophysics.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sue Frantz Highline Community
> College
> Psychology, Coordinator    Des Moines, WA
> 206.878.3710 x3404  sfra...@highline.edu
>
> Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology, Associate Director
>
> Teaching of Psychology Idea Exchange (ToPIX)
>
> APA Division 2: Society for the Teaching of Psychology
>
>
>
> APA's p...@cc Committee
>
>
>
> ---
>
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: tipsl...@gmail.com.
>
> To unsubscribe click here:
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13541.42a7e8017ab9578358f118300f4720fb&n=T&l=tips&o=7083
>
> (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken)
>
> or send a blank email to
> leave-7083-13541.42a7e8017ab9578358f118300f472...@fsulist.frostburg.edu



-- 
-- Mike

For Sale: Baby Shoes, Never Worn.
(Hemingway)

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7101
or send a blank email to 
leave-7101-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

[tips] A Long RandomThought: Sailing the "Seven C's"

[Louis E. Schmier]

It's a "by" low 20s south Georgia morning.  I just came in from the 
frigid streets after freezing my peaches off.  My nose is still as Carolina 
blue as my grubbies.  People in these parts may not know much about cold, but 
we do know a lot about warmth.  So, I want to talk about a student whom I'll 
call Sandra and a warming talk I recently had with her.  Sandra had text me 
last week as we brought the semester to a close:  "Finals for us students, 
Schmier.  Why should you be any different.  Here's yours, a 'take home':  'In 
one sentence, tell me what you wanted each of us who leaves your class to 
become?'  ONE SENTENCE.! You have one week.  I want to hear from you or you've 
failed.  REMEMBER THE CHAIR!!"

"Damn," I had said to myself with something less than a calm feeling.  "I've 
got to come up with about 150 final grades, start learning how to use clickers 
as an experiment in my first year classes, revamp all my syllabi for next 
semester, work on Susan's honey-do list, and now this, all before we leave on 
the 22nd for our two week holiday grandmunchkin-spoiling escapade to Nashville 
and San Mateo?"  Seriously, I could feel the fearful energy in her question.  
Sandra had struggled to come from her joyless shell and start being in 
community with her class community, with herself, and with me.  Now, I sensed, 
she was afraid it was all going to slip out of her hands.  Back in August, this 
first year, first semester student had come into the class smileless, with a 
blank stare, refusing eye contact, with a disbelieving soul, with a distrusting 
spirit, and with an empty and disheartening heart.  You could almost smell the 
fetid toxins flowing through her spirit.  Her stiffened body language spoke of 
being on full alert for lurking predators. Then, slowly, over the semester, I 
read in her journal about chips, small and guarded to be sure, she courageously 
had started making in her wall, about flecks of light she gallantly was slowly 
shining in her dark corner, about heroically slightly cracking open her closed 
gates, about guarded steps she bravely was taking as she slowly volunteered 
bits and pieces of her horror story and told some of her dark secrets.  It 
began surprisingly about ten days into the semester.  It was just after I did 
the last of the "Getting To Know Ya" classroom community building exercises, 
where I put myself out there in what I call my "What Do You Want To Know About 
Me" session.  That evening she wrote an entry that brought tears to my eyes and 
laid a heaviness on my heart: "The pinky.  Hope you're really for real and not 
a phony like all those others.  Not sure I believe you.  Are you blowing smoke 
or do you really give a damn?  I want to be another Kim.  I do.  Thinking of 
doing something I haven't done in years after all this hurt:  trusting, 
trusting that you can help me fight the demons tearing at me that have torn me 
down. Don't know why this time. Don't know why it's happening.  I'm scared.  
Don't want to be used again, don't want to be hurt some more, but then again, 
not much room left for new scars.  God, I don't want to be pissed on and 
shitted on again!  Don't know if I can take being let down again.  Oh, well, 
what do I have to lose.  It would be like just adding another beating or just 
another rape to all those other times.  Can I do it?  I want to.  Please, be 
real.  Care!"  I knew, I hoped, I was going to be witness to something 
magnificent.  And, it was.  It was truly the beginning of a daily titanic and 
transforming struggle for her.  In journal entry after journal entry she showed 
that she wanted to trust.  She wanted to believe.  She wanted to be noticed. 
She wanted to be respected.  She want to be validated.  She wanted to be heard. 
 She wanted to feel special.  She wanted to be joyous.  Now, at semester's end, 
I sensed from her challenge that she was struggling to figure out how to 
continue what had started happening to her inner self in the class.  So, I 
answered with an "okay, you're on."

For a week, I had her question as my backbeat.  A few days ago, I came up with 
my answer.  "Here's my ONE SENTENCE ANSWER," I nervously wrote to her,  "'I 
want you to become shipmasters who can skipper your own ships.'"

It was admittedly a deliberate lure.  She soon replied--with something more 
than an reprimanding tone of irritated surprise.  "I've been waiting, waiting, 
waiting.  It took you long enough.  But, Shipmasters?  Skipper? Ships?  You 
once wrote on the board, 'Beginning is tough, continuing is just as tough.'  I 
needed something to help me with the continuing stuff, and you're talking about 
joining a friggin' yacht club?  Don't be cute with me.  Get serious.  I'm 
disappointed, really disappointed.  More than annoyed.  Pissed off!  You let me 
down!!  And, don't give me that 'I was busy' crap.   As you told me once when I 
told you that I forgot to hand in an issue paper because I had a hell of a busy 
wee

Re: Re:[tips] A brilliant discovery

[Michael Smith]

"Too bad there's no job for people who remember odd bits of arcana"

I think there is ... a psychology professor :)

--Mike

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7099
or send a blank email to 
leave-7099-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Re:[tips] Ed Diener on YouTube

[Allen Esterson]

David Myers provided links to interviews with Ed Diener, including 
"What You Need To Be Happy":
http://www.youtube.com/user/BaylorAcademics

Given the nebulous nature of what we mean by "happiness", and not 
knowing anything about Ed Diener's work, I was prepared to be 
sceptical. Instead I was impressed to hear that he was not formulaic 
and ranged over a number of factors that tend to promote an 
individual's happiness.

One personal note: Diener says that people who like learning new things 
tend to be happier, and enjoy life more: "It doesn't have to be 
learning new things like in school where you're learning calculus or 
something boring,…"

To which I would respond: "boring" is in the mind of the beholder. :-)

Perhaps slightly off-topic: Diener finishes by emphasizing the 
universal importance of spirituality, which he defines as having 
positive emotions that connect you to things larger than yourself, or 
having goals and values beyond yourself. I suspect that may be a 
broader definition of spirituality than many people (both those who 
profess spiritual values, and those sceptical of the term) subscribe 
to. But one could argue that for want of another term that encompasses 
the characteristics that Diener so defines, it is legitimate for him to 
use the word as defined for the purposes of his research.

Thanks for drawing attention to your workshops, David.

Allen Esterson
Former lecturer, Science Department
Southwark College, London
allenester...@compuserve.com
http://www.esterson.org



From:   David Myers 
Subject:Ed Diener on YouTube
Date:   Thu, 9 Dec 2010 21:38:02 -0500
Passed along at the request of, and with thanks to, Michael Frisch:

Friends and Colleagues,

Two interviews I did with Ed Diener are now posted on YouTube for use 
in teaching, workshops, etc..  These were well-received at keynote 
addresses and workshops I just completed in London and Manchester for 
the British Psychological Society and the London MAPP program:

1. What You Need To Be Happy by Professor Ed Diener.MTS-12 minutes
The world authority on happiness and well-being research, Dr. Ed 
Diener, of the University of Illinois discusses what you need to be 
happy according to the latest research in a conversation with Professor 
Michael B. Frisch of Baylor University.

Tags: happiness, positive psychology, well-being, science, meaning, joy

Category: science and technology

2.The Happiest Place on Earth by  Professor Ed Diener.MTS-15 minutes
The world authority on happiness and well-being research, Dr. Ed 
Diener, of the University of Illinois discusses the happiest and 
unhappiest places on earth according to the latest research in a 
conversation with Professor Michael B. Frisch of Baylor University.

Tags: happiness, positive psychology, well-being, science, meaning, joy

Category: science and technology

  To access these, you can either search "Ed Diener" at YouTube or go 
directly to this Baylor University site:
http://www.youtube.com/user/BaylorAcademics



---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=7098
or send a blank email to 
leave-7098-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu