talking about scholarly article that was almost IMPOSSIBLE to post. keep in mind the library wouldnt let me print either

"Scott Page claims that groups of diverse persons are better at solving problems and making predictions than individuals who are smarter or groups with uniform perspectives and methods of looking at problems." 

This article is a review on a book that was written about diversity by Scott Page.  It is all about how a group of diverse people are more likely to solve a big problem than a group of alike people.  A diverse group has a set of different cultural backgrounds and probably grew up with a set of completely different beliefs and childhoods.  When a problem arises, like how to advertise a product for something... a group of diverse people are more likely to come up with the idea of a great way to apply to all viewers and not just one group of people.  The company definitely wants to look appealing to as many people as possible and the diverse advertising team will come up with the idea that will apply to all people, with different backgrounds, income, and beliefs.

scholarly diversity article

Full Text:COPYRIGHT 2009 University of North Carolina Press

The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups,

Firms, Schools and Societies

By Scott E. Page

Princeton University Press. 2007. 424 pages. $27.95 cloth.

Where do you store your ketchup, in the refrigerator or in the cupboard? Ketchup storage illustrates a problem of coordination when people do things differently. People don't much care how the condiment is stored; they just want to find it. However, sometimes we can improve our situation when we are exposed to other ideas and techniques. In the engaging book, The Difference, Scott Page claims that groups of diverse persons are better at solving problems and making predictions than individuals who are smarter or groups with uniform perspectives and methods of looking at problems. In terms of diversity, Page is talking about diverse ways of looking at, engaging with, interpreting and predicting solutions for problems. Rather than conforming to each other's perspectives, Page exhorts us to appreciate and work with our differences, like where we store ketchup, in order to be better problem solvers.

Page does not claim that diverse perspectives and toolkits will be better for solving problems in every case. In part, it depends on how one defines the "problem" to be solved. If the problem is finding the optimum new product to sell or public policy to employ, then a diverse set of perspectives is likely best. If the problem is how to mobilize a group into social action, then more uniformity might be better. Indeed, Page acknowledges that common perspectives allow for quick and error-free communication. The downside is that when we have identical perspectives, we are likely get stuck rather than find our way to the best solution. Our desire to conform, which is a function of our social being, leads to common perspectives. If everyone adopts an unproductive perspective, this can lead the group to make bad decisions. While he notes that "groupthink" can foster disastrous policy decisions, common perspectives can also foster trust, which can also lead to improved outcomes. So which is best when? The question remains unanswered.

Another difficulty is the source of diversity. Page notes that diverse perspectives do not come from the ether but are constructed from other perspectives. In this process, there is superadditivity: One plus one equals twelve. "Thus, if we hope to continue to innovate and reach new understandings, we must encourage the creation of new and diverse perspectives." (50) But how does this work? How do we create these diverse toolkits? Page doesn't really explain this although he does explain that affirmative action might fit within his framework. But this may be an important question that relates back to his model. One can envision different models for achieving diversity in cognitive toolkits. For example, there might be institutionalized diversity (like affirmative action), spatial diversity, and collective or "ground-up" diversity (through the use of so-called "weak ties" in a network). But, how people with diverse tools are assembled may affect the ability of the collective to perform the desired task.

This issue also relates back to the problem definition. Problems can involve information aggregation (each person in a group holds a different piece of the puzzle), coordinated searching (we spread out in search of the best solution), and sharing different perspectives (the classic brainstorming session). These are all present in The Difference, but it would seem the processes are very different. Social influences would seem to play a large role, but he does not discuss a specific mechanism.

Page creatively illustrates his model in interesting thought experiments, but the book's empirics are a little thin. This is understandable in that Page is explaining a model that generates hypotheses, but this reader yearned for more concrete examples. Of course, the book should motivate empirical researchers across (yes) diverse disciplines, from social psychologists to social network analysts to business school researchers. And the book does raise interesting questions that could link disciplines. Are diffusions of fads facilitated by lack of diversity in perspectives? Is innovation and entrepreneurship really the interaction of diverse perspectives that are socially linked?

The book is intelligently written and fun to read. Given that Page's underlying academic work is in computational modeling, this book is aimed at a larger audience, and it succeeds in making the ideas accessible and appealing. In the end, Page presents a clear roadmap or model that connects certain kinds of diversity with certain kinds of problem-solving and predicting.

I store my ketchup in the fridge, but from now on I will consider the perspectives of those who put the Heinz bottle in the cupboard (or even use the spelling "catsup").

Reviewer: John C. Scott, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Gale Document Number:A211714811

Diversity article

abercrombie & fitch lawsuit article

Abercrombie & Fitch recently settled a lawsuit for 40 to 50 million dollars to employees who said there was discriminatory labor practice.

My song is Died a Jew, by Say Anything.

Died A Jew - Say Anything

You say you're a shade in my face from my father's share crops

My people were slaves before yours invented hip-hop

Apologize but I'm in on the joke

Another brother to scoff at the dancing patterns of white folk

I think I'm fine the way I am

(and yes I chase my milk with ham)

I think I'm fine the way I am

Jesus Died A Jew

pupils painted blue

yeah haters know its true

Jesus died a jew

you saw you're the breath on my nose of my daddy's ear locks

shunned before you pieced it and sold it and called it punk rock

apologize for the murder of god

like Judas the traitor we are both favored and deeply flawed

I think I'm fine the way I am

(although we broke our promised land)

I think I'm fine the way I am

Jesus died a jew

pupils painted blue

yeah haters know its true

Jesus died a jew

so I'll let it burn away

let it burn away

let it burn away

let it burn away

[ Died A Jew lyrics from

http://www.lyricsyoulove.com/s/say_anything/died_a_jew/ ]

***SONG ANALYSIS
Song- Died a Jew
Artist- Say Anything
Genre- Rock
Released- 2007

The issue that is being addressed is race relations.  This song says that Jesus was a Jew and it is basically addressing the controversial issues that a lot of people believe that Jesus was white.  I think that this belief mainly stems from the many white people that came over to America from England in the 1700's.  The huge Anglican Church was in charge of everything, and they were all white, so of course, everyone claimed that Jesus was white.  Also, it was even said in the Bible that Jesus was from Jerusalem, there's no way he could just be white.   This song just says that what everything claims just because white was the supreme race for a long time, that Jesus was white.

fort hood

1. What are your thoughts, feelings, etc, as you read these articles?

I think that this article was very shocking because it was "friendly fire." But then, as I read into it, I learned that he was a Muslim and his fellow soldiers had been making fun of him and calling him things like "Camel Jockey" and other politically incorrect things. I understand that they were just joking around but apparently it really got to him.

2. What role do you think terrorism played in this massacre, if any? Why? Do you think that there was an terrorist organization behind the shooting?

I think that how our society acts about terrorism is pretty bad. Meaning that we always say things that could hurt people who are the race of the people that we are at war with, even though we obviously know that they are not terrorists. I think that this could have been a planned event from an organization but I don't think its likely. Regardless if it is an inside job or not, I bet that some people would consider it racist if we were to claim that it was a terrorist attack just because of what race he is.


3. What role did racism or religious persecution play in this incident? Why?

above.


4. Do you think a lot of Muslim Americans have the same feelings as this man? Why or why not?

I bet that there are a lot of Muslims that feel that way but I don't think that they are in the army or on a military base. I think that if there are Muslims that feel that way, then they should not be any leader of any sort in the military. This is unacceptable.

5. What do you think the military could have done to prevent this from happening? Why do you believe this? Were there signs that this man had the potential to do something like this? What were they?

I think that the military should definitely done something about it because he had already expressed his opinion on America and how he doesn't want to be in the military. I think that its a little bit ridiculous because if someone was saying stuff like that, they should not be able to be a leader of any sort. Those were signs that he could have done something like this.

6. Talk about the leadership of Kimberly Munley (the woman who stopped the shooter). What did she do? How would you have reacted in the same situation?

I think that Kimberly Munley had a huge amount of leadership. She risked her life to save other people. She was trained for something like this that you go right after the shooter right away, risking yourself, and there will be less fatalities. Even though she was being shot at, she still went on to take the shooter down. I would like to say that I would try to take them out but I probably would have ran or hid. I've had dreams about this sort of thing where I attacked the shooter from when they weren't looking. That's probably the only thing I would be brave enough to do.

7. What does this incident say about race relations in America? Specifically with Arab-Americans and Muslims? Is there a reason that Muslims and people from the Arab world feel a certain way about
America?

I think that people in America, often see all Muslims as the enemy just because of what happened in 2001 and who we are at war with. That doesn't mean that all Arab-Americans and Muslims are all bad and trying to conspire to kill Americans. Like I said before, if people accused it of being an inside attack, they would be accused of being racist.

Leadership Aspects

My article is called Think Excellence by Lee Colan. This article is under the category of Confidence in Leadership Qualities.

This article is all about thinking. It uses the quote, "Weather you think you can, or cannot, you're right." We receive what we believe about leadership. This works the same way with negative thoughts as positive thoughts. It also talks about how people question things like, 'how can I be positive all the time when bad things happen?' It says, that if you are a true leader, then you would be able to take the good with the bad and always stay positive. I think that this article applies to anyone who wants to be a positive leader. I think that it really can affect people who are in the high school level and the college level.

I think that this will affect a lot of people in the world. It also affected me because I need to have more self-confidence. This article gives examples of times when leaders had to step up and how they achieved greatness. You have to have a good attitude to achieve great things.

I think that the most important aspect in this article is that to be a good leader, you have to apply yourself and believe in yourself. You have to believe that you can achieve greatness and 'Think Excellence.' This article is important because anyone who is struggling with achieving good things, probably lacks self-confidence. Reading this article can help someone to believe that they can do it and then they will be able to.



I think that the beliefs that the author writes in this article are completely true. The famous saying about thinking you can or cant is true. Its hard to realize if you are not successful to begin with because you are lacking self confidence, but if you think you can then you are having a better attitude, and you will achieve more.

Odd Article

http://zaphod.eu/admin/?cmd=cat%20/etc/pass


This article is about a family with parents who have recently been convicted of torturing their children to raise them. It says that they hit them with shoe horns and stabbed them with knives and forks as a form of discipline. It was discovered when one of the three children told a school nurse about how their parents treated them. The parents are in complete denial, they said things like, how could you accuse us of hitting our beloved children?

I think that this is news because abusing children is a very serious thing. I think that it is odd because we have all heard of abuse but not many people have heard of people stabbing their children with knives and forks as a form of discipline to raise them.

I think that the parents have done this to their children but it makes me wonder because the children are like 6, 8, and 10... so what if they made it up? A lot of children could do something like this if they do not like their parents.. but in reading this case, I think that the parents actually did do it because of how the children were scared to tell anyone about it and that is a strange thing to just make up.

4th Post

1. Something that John Wooden believed that stood out to me was definitely that he allowed all the chance to achieve greatness. In some sports in my school, if you are on JV then you are assumed not to move up that season since you were put on JV in the first place. A lot of times, even if that person's skills increase significantly, they wont play because the coach is only focused on varsity. They don't pay attention to the younger players or the ones who didn't stand out in the first couple of weeks. John Wooden made it clear that anyone could start. He made sure that even his best players knew that their spots were not set in stone.
2. I honestly cant think of a coach I've had that has coached like Wooden. Some coaches are similar in some ways but don't stand out to me. One coach who sort of made the point of everyone being able to achieve greatness but didn't necessarily follow through, was my basketball coach last year. He had told all of us that anyone could start. Eventually a couple of girls got in at the end of the season and I support that because during the season they worked hard and their skills did increase significantly.
3. I think it is very important to study leadership. If our leaders didn't take examples from great leaders then no one would be successful. If you are a leader, you need to study the things that great leaders did and what morals they had if you want to be a successful leader also.

3rd blog

1. In the later pages that I have read, I have gotten to read about more of the parts of the pyramid of success in more detail. I am towards the end of it and it is all coming together now. There are a lot of things that I have found very interesting. "Never stoop to playing dirty-- play hard and don't complain." -John Wooden. Quotes like that are things that I have been reading about. This quote and this section in the book really taught me a lot. I've realized that you always have to push your hardest and give 100% if you want to reach success.
2. One of the main things that my author is pushing on leadership is that, it's not about winning. Its about the fight. This is something that I have realized is that is really important if you want success. If you put up a great fight and the outcome doesn't come out with you having more points, then you had a moral win, which is much more important than winning on the score board.
3. "A leader who is ruled by emotions, whose temperament is mercurial, produces a team whose trademark is the roller coaster- ups and downs in performance; unpredictability and undependability in effort and concentration; one day good, the next day bad. (John Wooden, 107)" --This quote is one of the huge things that I think really decides weather you are going to be a strong and successful leader. I think that this is what has failed one of my teams that I am currently on and I think that if that coach would realize this, then we would be more successful. Controlling your emotions is something that I think is extremely important as a leader. If the leader cannot control themselves, then they can't expect anyone else who looks up to them to control theirs.
4. In biology yesterday, we were taking a test on microscopes and a student next to me asked me to tell them the answer. I said that I didn't know, even though I did and I knew I had it right. I made the ethical decision not to let that person cheat. Also because I turned out doing bad on that test... but that answer was still right!

1. I am really liking this book now. The beginning was all about his life and now it is about how he developed his pyramid for leadership. It is very inspirational. The things that stand out so far are definitely the things about what you need if you want to be a leader. The main thing that stood out to me is the part on Self Control. "Control of self is essential for consistency in leadership and team performance." "Self-control in little things leads to control of the bigger things.
2. My views of leadership have changed in the way that I didn't know that it took so many elements to be a successful leader. I am learning all of the things that are necessary qualities to have to be a good leader. Such as, self-control, enthusiasm, initiative, effort, skill and many more.
3. I was put in a leadership position when our class was decorating the hallways. Ana and I were the main ones who led and told people what to do. We had to come up with a lot of ideas and we had to help direct people on what to do. We didn't have much time so we had to keep people on task. I wouldn't do anything different unless maybe be a little more prepared on what we needed to do.
4. "A leader must have initiative- the courage to make decisions, to act, and the willingness and strength to risk failure and take a stand even when it goes against the opinion of others (Wooden, 43)" I can use this quote in the future to motivate me to take a stand for what I believe in. You can't worry about what others will think of you or weather you might fail or not.

Wooden

I read the beginning of the book, Wooden on Leadership by Coach John Wooden. I have so far read the whole introduction which is a short autobiography of his life. He says how he measures success is the most important thing. He seems so far like he is different than many other coaches. He never cared weather they won or lost, he cared weather they tried 100% and played their hearts. He is also different because he never listened to rankings or anything like that. He never let himself loose sleep fearing the other team. He said he wanted the other team to loose sleep worrying about them. Winning-wise, one of his most unsuccessful seasons was the year of 59-60. Their last game they played was the one that determined weather they broke .500 or not. Spectators said that the program was going down the drain but Wooden thinks that team was very successful. They just didn't have that much talent, but they gave they're all. In just four years, his next team went 30-0.