Making Sure Your Horse Listens to Your Commands-Leg Pressure and Resistance

Horses are creatures with their own mind and repeated training is necessary to keep it responsive to the rider's needs. When engaged in a diagonal pattern across an arena, I notice that my horse soon moves crooked with his belly pushed to one side. As I use my heel to encourage her to round to my leg she wants to fight against it! She gets upset and pushes even harder to make herself even more "out of whack". A horse should have its head and body aligned to the direction and resistance means more training.

The horse must listen to the rider. If the horse doesn't listen it is untrustworthy and therefore needs training to ensure that it follows direction. You don't ever give up your needs or commands until the horse complies. If you do she will assume she is in control of the ride....that is when things can get dangerous. Repeat the command in different ways until she complies.

I have come up with this pattern to better ensure compliance.

1.) Give the command once softly and then once harder at the trot.

2.) If that doesn't work I then move to a walk and give the command first softly and then harder.

3.) If she fails to respond we stop and I will repeat the command in different ways until the horse complies.

4.) If she still is not following the commands I get off the horse and move to the side and push the horse to help her understand what the pressure/poking is telling her.

Protect Your Valuables with a Portable Safe

Program Decision Making with the CIPP Model of Evaluation

Starting projects and following them to completion can be a daunting task. We often get lost in the "weeds" and unsure of how well our plan actually worked. While some managers may want to "just go" with a new project they leave few to no mechanisms of evaluating the outcomes, it is wiser to think systematically. Mistakes can be costly and embarrassing. The CIPP Model offers a method of evaluating program implementation using context, input, process and product (Stufflebeam, 1983). 

CIPP model of evaluation:

• Context: What needs to be done? 
• Input: How should it be done? 
• Process: Is it being done? 
• Product: Is it succeeding?

Using four different ways of evaluating a project means that it has achieved a wide array of relevance. It fits within the needs of the business and environment, it is designed appropriately, it is implemented, and whether or not it is succeeding in its tasks. 

Sometimes as managers we fail to take a systematic approach to reviewing our work. Without a consistent method we will have different comparisons for different programs and this will leave us unsure of how successful it was. The CIPP model is broad enough to use in a variety of projects.

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971a). The use of experimental design in educational evaluation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 8(4), 267-274.

Boulmetis, J., & Dutwin, P. (2005). The ABCs of evaluation: Timeless techniques for program and project managers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention

The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention ISSN (Online): 2349-2031 http://valleyinternational.net/index.php/theijsshi Volume 05 - Issue 07 July 2018

------------------------------------------------------- The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention  is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal, published by the Valley international journal. The journal is published Monthly in online versions. The Journal accepts article submissions online or by e-mail: info@valleyinternational.net ------------------------------------------------ Open Access Policy: This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Copyright Policy: Copyrights for articles are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. Authors have rights to reuse, republish, archive, and distribute their own articles after publication. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. ------------------------------------------

The Determination of Genius

Some wonder how we may determine if someone is a genius. We may look for high intelligence but this could be complicated by expression or we may seek to look for creativity and get confused with unique. The finding of genius is possible when we look for three markers that include human intelligence, creativity and performance. Within each of these markers may be other identifiers that lead to greater insight.

Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence:

Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence indicates that there are three components to determine human intelligence that include analytical, creative and practical. Each of these components creates the whole person and their ability to work through daily problems to achieve their goals.

Analytical (componential): The ability to process information from an analytical standpoint. It is the raw intelligence that allows us to remember things, process stimuli, make meaning out of it and take action. It is the type of intelligence that leads to higher performance in academic arenas. 

Creative (experiential): The ability to think about things in a new way and master novel situations that may be more difficult for others. It is a process of consciously learning and then moving that to automatic learning to take on new tasks. 

\
Practical (contextual): This is the "street smarts" that allows people to live and function within their environment. Every day people must navigate relatively new tasks in order to survive. Their ability to do this is important in the process.

Creativity, Language and Biochemical Markets:

They found that...,"higher verbal ability versus lower verbal ability participants, providing neurobiological support for a critical “threshold” regarding the relationship between intelligence and creativity." Those who can speak well, use metaphors, understand language and how to use it better were generally more creative than those who don't.

"Based on previous magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy studies demonstrating relationships between cognitive ability and concentrations of N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA), a common neurometabolite, we hypothesized that NAA assessed in gray and white matter (from a supraventricular slab) would relate to laboratory measures of creativity. "

Thus, a person with an IQ of 120 could have the capacity for creativity and this could lead to genius. They were not only good at the use of language but often divergent thinkers that can weigh and balance the sides of multiple arguments. It is believed they have higher through the neuro connections within their brain. Thus a person with a 135 IQ and higher levels of creativity may well be a genius even if they haven't performed in a way that allows them public exposure.

Genius is About Long-term Performance:

There are latent genius and performing genius based on the books they write, science they engage in and the overall output of their efforts. While IQ is important there isn't a specific number that matters once you get to the 130+ range. The reason is that IQ tests are only tests and imperfect and likely flawed in many ways. The truest acts of a genius are performance and excelling in their field beyond their contemporaries. Genius write books, invent stuff, create art and are highly engaged in fine activities.

Kalb, C. (May 2017). What makes a genius? National Geographic. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/05/genius-genetics-intelligence-neuroscience-creativity-einstein/

No Author.(January 24th, 2004)Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence.
Retrieved 06/25/2018 from http://wilderdom.com/personality/L2-2SternbergTriarchicTheory.html

Jung, R. et. al. (2009). Biochemical Support for the “Threshold” Theory of Creativity: A Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Study. Journal of Neuroscience, 29 (16) 5319-5325; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0588-09.2009

High Quality Print Castille De Angelo

Raising the Quality of Education Through Better Adjunct Faculty Community Building

I came across an article entitled Colleges Can Hire Adjunct Faculty Cheap — but Does that Harm Education? discussing whether hiring too many adjuncts hurts higher education. The author outlines some good cases and what others have stated about the process. The answer is "maybe" depending on how these adjuncts are connected to the university, their pay, and their accountability.

First, we need full-time professors to ensure that quality of the programs are high and there are core faculty that understand the inner workings and needs of the organization. It is true that many adjuncts won't necessarily understand how to make changes to curriculum or how to navigate the process for better educational outcomes. They may have no idea what the outcomes of their class are!

That doesn't mean they aren't doing their jobs but they are doing what is required from them based on their limited knowledge of the whole picture that can only be learned by being "in house". Thus full-time professors are extremely important to the functioning of adjunct faculty when they have the ability to oversee the work that is being conducted.

Pay is also important. Yes...cheap labor is great for universities. However, there is an issue of equity. People with PhD's spent many years in the educational field and incurred high costs in doing so. They want a return on that investment. If they are not able to earn equity through higher pay they may adjust their efforts to match the compensation they receive.

Being an educated person is as much about lifestyle as it is about compensation. They want to feel they are part of a community of thinkers and want their ideas validated through the university and the classes they teach. Creating a community helps them feel that connection and influence the environment in a way that ties them more closely to their work through personal ownership.

A few ways they can be connected to a community include:

- Direct contact with core faculty that can guide them and listen to them.
-Informed about university policies and changes.
- Given compensation and allocation for research they can use in their class.
-Inviting them to meet and socialize virtually and face-to-face.
-Providing gifts of appreciation and recognition.
-Letting them have more creative output in their courses.
- Soliciting their views and opinions through the senate process and during administrative changes.
-Providing feedback on how their classes are doing and developing them for greater responsibilities.
-Allowing them to do other types of work for compensation such as drafting proposals, book reviews, and outreach.
-Collaborate with other faculty to create new research.

Contract work has its inherent advantages and disadvantages built right into it. Its an issue because it is part of the inherent type of work related to being an adjunct and solutions are not easy to find. Most adjunct want to connect more and hear more from the university. There may be some that are just looking for whatever pay they can get and don't care about their students; but, I don't think this represents most. The one's I have met are very interested and have full-time jobs at other places. They continue to teach because they love it!