Successful Entrepreneur

Steve Jobs is one of the most successful entrepreneurs and was listed as Fortune Magazine’s Number One most powerful businessman of 2007 out of twenty-five other top businessmen. He is the co-founder, chairman and CEO of Apple Inc. and was the CEO of Pixar Animation Studios until it was acquired by the Walt Disney Company in 2006. Steve Jobs is currently the Walt Disney Company’s largest shareholder and a member of its Board of Directors. He is considered a leading figure in both the computer and entertainment industries. He is also widely credited as the inventor of the Macintosh, the iPod, the iTunes Store, and the iPhone, among other things. His history in business has contributed greatly to the myths of the quirky, individualistic Silicon Valley entrepreneur, emphasizing the importance of design while understanding the crucial role aesthetics play in public appeal. His work driving forward the development of products that are both functional and elegant has earned him a devoted and popular following. Steve Jobs passion was always technology from a young age, so he took his first job at Atari Inc. hich was a leading manufacturer of video games. He struck up a friendship with fellow designer Steve Wozniak. Steve and Steve developed a system with a toy whistle which made it possible to make free long distance telephone calls. Together with Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs helped popularize the personal computer in the late ‘70s, and in the early ‘80s. After losing a power struggle with the board of directors in 1985, Steve Jobs resigned from Apple and founded NEXT, a computer platform development company specializing in the higher education and business markets. NeXT’s subsequent 1997 buyout by Apple brought Steve back to the company he co-founded, and he has served as its chief executive officer since his return. A true example of a successful entrepreneur who strived with his passion to be the best. Life story of Steve Paul Jobs :- Steve Paul Jobs, was an orphan adopted by Paul and Clara Jobs of Mountain View, California in 24th February 1955. Jobs was not happy at school in Mountain View so the family moved to Los Altos, California, where Steven attended Homestead High School. His electronics teacher at Homestead High, Hohn McCollum. After school, Jobs attended lectures at the Hewlett-Packard electronics firm in Palo Alto, California. There he was hired as a summer employee. Another employee at Hewlett-Packard was Stephen Wozniak a recent dropout from the University of California at Berkeley. An engineering whiz with a passion for inventing electronic gadgets, Wozniak at that time was perfecting his â€Å"blue box,† an illegal pocket-size telephone attachment that would allow the user to make free long-distance calls. Jobs helped Wozniak sell a number of the devices to customers. In 1972 Jobs graduated from high school and register at Reed College in Portland, Oregon. After dropping out of Reed after one semester, he hung around campus for a year, taking classes in philosophy and immersing himself in the counterculture. Early in 1974 Jobs took a job as a video game designer at Atari, Inc. , a pioneer in electronic arcade recreation. After several months working, he saved enough money to adventure on a trip to India where he traveled in search of spiritual enlightenment in the company of Dan Kottke, a friend from Reed College. In autumn of 1974, Jobs returned to California and began attending meetings of Wozniak's â€Å"Homebrew Computer Club. † Wozniak, like most of the club's members, was content with the joy of electronics creation. Jobs was not interested in creating electronics and was nowhere near as good an engineer as Woz. He had his eye on marketability of electronic products and persuaded Wozniak to work with him toward building a personal computer. Wozniak and Jobs designed the Apple I computer in Jobs's bedroom and they built the prototype in the Jobs' garage. Jobs showed the machine to a local electronics equipment retailer, who ordered twenty-five. Jobs received marketing advice from a friend, who was a retired CEO from Intel, and he helped them with marketing strategies for selling their new product. Jobs and Wozniak had great inspiration in starting a computer company that would produce and sell computers. To start this company they sold their most valuable possessions. Jobs sold his Volkswagen micro-bus and Wozniak sold his Hewlett-Packard scientific calculator, which raised $1,300 to start their new company. With that capital base and credit begged from local electronics suppliers, they set up their first production line. Jobs encouraged Wozniak quit his job at Hewlett-Packard to become the vice president in charge of research and development of the new enterprise. And he did quit his job to become vice president. Jobs came up with the name of their new company Apple in memory of a happy summer he had spent as an orchard worker in Oregon. Apple Company and Steve Jobs : Jobs and Wozniak put together their first computer, called the Apple I. They marketed it in 1976 at a price of $666. The Apple I was the first single-board computer with built-in video interface, and on-board ROM, which told the machine how to load other programs from an external source. Jobs was marketing the Apple I at hobbyists like members of the Homebrew Computer Club who could now perform their own operations on their personal computers. Jobs and Wozniak managed to earn $774,000 from the sales of the Apple I. The following year, Jobs and Wozniak developed the general purpose Apple II. The design of the Apple II did not depart from Apple I's simplistic and compactness design. The Apple II was the Volkswagon of computers. The Apple II had built-in circuitry allowing it to interface directly to a color video monitor. Jobs encouraged independent programmers to invent applications for Apple II. The result was a library of some 16,000 software programs. For the Apple II computer to compete against IBM, Jobs needed better marketing skills. To increase his marketing edge he brought Regis McKenna and Nolan Bushnell into the company. McKenna was the foremost public relations man in the Silicon Valley. Nolan Bushnell was Jobs's former supervisor at Atari. Bushnell put Jobs in touch with Don Valentine, a venture capitalist, who told Markkula, the former marketing manager at Intel, that Apple was worth looking into. Buying into Apple with an investment variously estimated between $91,000 and $250,000, Markkula became chairman of the company in May 1977. The following month Michael Scott, who was director of manufacturing at Semi-Conductor Inc. , became president of Apple. Through Markkula, Apple accumulated a line of credit with the Bank of America and $600,000 in venture capital from the Rockefellers and Arthur Roch. Quickly setting the standard in personal computers, the Apple II had earnings of $139,000,000 within three years, a growth of 700 percent. Impressed with that growth, and a trend indicating an additional worth of 35 to 40 percent, the cautious underwriting firm of Hambrecht & Quist in cooperation with Wall Street's prestigious Morgan Stanley, Inc. , took Apple public in 1980. The underwriters price of $22 per share went up to $29 the first day of trading, bringing the market value of Apple to $1. 2 billion. In 1982 Apple had sales of $583,000,000 up 74 percent from 1981. Its net earnings were $1. 6 a share, up 55 percent, and as of December 1982, the company's stock was selling for approximately $30 a share. Over the past seven years of Apple's creation, Jobs had created a strong productive company with a growth curve like a straight line North with no serious competitors. From 1978 to 1983, its compound growth rate was over 150% a year. Then IBM muscled into the personal computer business. Two years after introducing its PC, IBM passed Apple in dollar sales of the machines. IBM's dominance had made its operating system an industry standard which was not compatible with Apple's products. Jobs knew in order to compete with IBM, he would have to make the Apple compatible with IBM computers and needed to introduce new computers that could be marketed in the business world which IBM controlled. To help him market these new computers Jobs recruited John Sculley from Pesi Cola for a position as president at Apple. Jobs enticed Scully to Apple with a challenge: â€Å"If you stay at Pepsi, five years from now all you'll have accomplished is selling a lot more sugar water to kids. If you come to Apple you can change the world. Jobs in 1981 introduced the Apple III, which had never fully recovered from its traumatic introduction, because Apple had to recall the first 14,000 units to remedy design flaws, and then had trouble selling the re-engineered version. Another Apple failure was the mouse-controlled Lisa, announced to stockholders in 1983. It should have been a world beater, because Lisa was the first personal computer controlled by a mouse which made it have a user-friendly interface, but had an un-friendly price of $10,000. The worst thing about Apple's development of computers was they lacked coherence. Each of Apple's three computers used a separate operating system. Jobs designed the Macintosh to compete with the PC and, in turn, make Apple's new products a success. In an effort to revitalize the company and prevent it from falling victim to corporate bureaucracy, Jobs launched a campaign to bring back the values and entrepreneurial spirit that characterized Apple in its garage shop days. In developing the Macintosh, he tried to re-create an atmosphere in which the computer industry's highly individualistic, talented, and often eccentric software and hardware designers could flourish. The Macintosh had 128K of memory, twice that of the PC, and the memory could be expandable up to192K. The Mac's 32-bit microprocessor did more things and out performed the PC's 16-bit microprocessor. The larger concern of management concerning the Macintosh was not IBM compatible. This caused an uphill fight for Apple in trying to sell Macintosh to big corporations that where IBM territory. â€Å"We have thought about this very hard and it old be easy for us to come out with an IBM look-alike product, and put the Apple logo on it, and sell a lot of Apples. Our earning per share would go up and our stock holders would be happy, but we think that would be the wrong thing to do,† says Jobs. The strengths of Macintosh design was not memory, power, or manipulative ability, but friendliness, flexibility, and adaptability to perform creative work. The Macintosh held the moments possibility that computer technology would evolve beyond the mindless crunching of numbers for legions of corporate bean-counters. As the print campaign claimed, the Macintosh was the computer â€Å"for the rest of us. † The strategy Jobs used to introduce the Macintosh in 1984 was radical. The Macintosh, with all its apparent vulnerability, was a revolutionary act infused with altruism, a technological bomb-throwing. When the machine was introduced to the public on Super Bowl Sunday it was, as Apple Chairman Steve Jobs described it, â€Å"kind of like watching the gladiator going into the arena and saying, ‘Here it is. † The commercial had a young woman athlete being chased by faceless storm-troopers who raced past hundreds of vacant eyed workers and hurled a sledgehammer into the image of a menacing voice. A transcendent blast. Then a calm, cultivated speaker assured the astonished multitudes that 1984 would not be like 1984. Macintosh had entered the arena. That week, countless newspapers and magazines ran stories with titles like â€Å"What were you doing when the ‘1984' commercial ran? † Jobs' invocation of the gladiator image is not incidental here. Throughout the development of the Macintosh, he had fanned the fervor of the design team by characterizing them as brilliant, committed marhinals. He repeatedly clothed both public and private statements about the machine in revolutionary, sometimes violent imagery, first encouraging his compatriots to see themselves as outlaws, and then target the audience to imagine themselves as revolutionaries. Jobs, like all those who worked on the project, saw the Macintosh as something that would change the world. Jobs described his Macintosh developing team as souls who were â€Å"well grounded in the philosophical traditions of the last 100 years and the sociological traditions of the 60's. The Macintosh team pursued their project through grueling hours and against formidable odds. A reporter who interviewed the team wrote: â€Å"The machine's development was, in turn, traumatic, joyful, grueling, lunatic, rewarding and ultimately the major event in the lives of almost everyone involved†. The image Jobs wanted the public to have of the Macintosh was young, wears blue jeans, and lives in an 80's version of the 60's counterculture. Macintosh was impatient, uncomfortable, and contemptuous of everything that was conventional or hierarchical. He/she was both creative and committed, believing strongly that his/her work ultimately matters. Even if we counted beans for a living, we secretly saw ourselves as Romantic poets. Jobs approach in developing the Macintosh was like the history of telephones. When the telegraph became popular for communication a century ago, some people suggested putting a telegraph machine on everyone's desk, but everyone would have had to learn Morse code. Just a few years later Alexander Graham Bell filed his first patents for the telephone, and that easy-to-use technology became the standard means of communication. â€Å"We're at same juncture; people just are not going to be willing to spend the time learning Morse code, or reading a 400-page manual on word processing. The current generation of personal computers just will not any longer. We want to make a product like the first telephone. We want to make mass market appliances. What we are trying to develop is a computer that can do all those things that you might expect, but we also offer a much higher performance which takes the form of a very easy-to-use product. † As the Macintosh took off in sales and became a big hit, John Sculley felt Jobs was hurting the company, and persuaded the board to strip him of power. John Sculley tried to change the discipline of the company by controlling costs, reducing overhead, rationalizing product lines to an organization that some in the industry called Camp Runamok. Sculley came to the conclusion that â€Å"we could run a lot better with Steve out of operations,† he says. Jobs tended to value technological â€Å"elegance† over customer needs which is a costly luxury at a time of slowing sales. And Jobs's intense involvement with the Macintosh project had a demoralizing effect on Apple's other divisions. Jobs was exiled to an office in an auxiliary building that he nicknamed â€Å"Siberia. † Jobs says he did not get any assignments and gradually found that important company documents no longer landed on his desk. He told every member of the executive staff that he wanted to be helpful in any way he could, and he made sure each had his home phone number. Few ever called back. â€Å"It was very clear there was nothing for me to do,† he says, â€Å"I need a purpose to make me go. † He soon came to believe that he would find no purpose within Apple. In July, Sculley had told security analysts in a meeting that Jobs would have no role in the operations of the company â€Å"now or in the future. † When Jobs heard of the message he said, â€Å"You've probably had somebody punch you in the stomach and it knocks the wind out you and you cannot breathe. The harder you try to breathe, the more you cannot breathe. And you know that the only thing you can do is just relax so you can start breathing again. † The Next Step Steve’s Come back to Apple : Jobs sold over $20 million of his Apple stock, spent days bicycling along the beach, feeling sad and lost, toured Paris, also goes on a spiritual trip to India with his friend. The Mr. Nobody, Steve, started again once he was out of his super rich, super successful period. After three years, he founded a new company, ‘Next’. He launched Next Cube. It was an extremely powerful and much expensive machine at that time and probably, an offering to an immature market. It failed miserably. Then Steve and his company, Next, moved to the making of softwares and operating systems. His money and property were not with him, but his creative mind was. He showed an interest in George Lucas’ company, the Pixar Animations. George Lucas is considered the father of modern special effects in the films. Lucas was not interested in Pixar, so Steve took charge of the company in 1986. He entered into a contract with Disney in 1990. Pixar made the animations and Disney did the marketing and distribution of the animation films. Steve could read the future five years ahead. In 1995, the ‘Toy Story’ proved to be the huge success in Hollywood and Pixar never looked back. But now this Steve was not the Steve of 1080s. He gradually became Zen Buddhist. Meanwhile, he saw Bill Gates climbing the success ladder with sheer business techniques and not with orthodox ideologies. By the way, the flagship product of Microsoft, the Windows operation system, is nothing but an adaptation of the ideas of Steve’s Macintosh computer. Bill Gates proves to be an extremely practically businessman who along with working for Apple also copied the technologies of Apple Macintosh! Oh! You would ask what happened to Apple after Steve’s exit! Imagine a body without its soul! This is no exaggeration. After leaving its soul, the company instead of running, started crawling. Without Steve, the entire computer business in the world changed in the decade of 90s. Nobody could match the steps with the changing times. Apple Corporation was about to announce bankruptcy and it was about to become insolvent. At that time, the then Apple’ boss, Mr. Gil Emilio took an unprecedented decision. He decided to buy a new operating system for the Mac computers. And the best and advanced operating systems were made by only one company in the vicinity, and that was Steve Jobs’ company, ‘Next’†¦! As per the contract between the Apple and the Next, Steve re-entered his own company after 12 years†¦.! And that too, just for a salary of $ 1 a year†¦! But this time the new Steve was different from what he used to be back in 1980s. This Steve came with a lot of learning from life. Now it was his turn to stage the boardroom drama. In 1997, in the board meeting Steve once again was elected the CEO of the Apple Corporation. The new all-powered Steve created ‘Ometra’, the contract; wherein all the employees were made to agree to the term that the boss’ decision is final in any matter! Steve had already tasted the fruits of being the ‘ideologist’. Now he was a shrewd businessman, with a lot of practical mind setup. He knew that Apple did not have enough funds to carry out its research projects. So he played one big master stroke. He invited none other than, Mr. Bill Gates to invest in Apple†¦! Bill Gates was more than ready to invest in Apple, because the person, who copied the technologies of Steve, had to have the greatest trust in his capabilities! Apple was now on track again. Steve was still purist and idealistic as far as the technological innovations and the aesthetic looks are concerned. He made the new ‘OSX’ operating system, which was a huge success in the market (In OSX, we already have different versions like, Chitah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger. Recently we have seen the successful launch of its Leopard & Snow Leopard version in 2007). Steve also launched the transparent computers in the market for the first time in the name of iMac. Then, we got the super finely designed, iBook laptop from Apple. In 2001, Steve made portable digital music player called, the iPod. Steve always considered the Windows operating System an inferior product as compared to the Macintosh products (which to a large extent is even true). He always called Windows as ‘Working in Hell’. But this Steve was ready to compromise with his beliefs for the success of his company. He, eventually, started making the Windows enabled Macintosh computers. The unimaginable success of iPode literally scrambled the pillars of world music industry! Just two years ago, he sold out his animation studio Pixar to Disney and in return, got the life-time directorship on the Disney’s board. Steve re-entered Apple by playing the gimmick of taking a salary of $ 1 per year. But he, after getting into his company again, proved very influential and last year he was the highest-paid CEO of America! But amidst such an entire scenario, the time and life struggles had taken their toll on Steve’s health. He was diagnosed with Pancreas cancer. He fought with his cancer also and came back victoriously. He sensed that the mobiles with music player were giving tough competition to his iPod. So, he decided to enter an entirely new market segment for Apple, the mobile market. And the result is in front of us ! The iPhone ! Apple’s creativity has got a support in the face of a ruthless, hardcore, practical businessman. The Apple Corporation, today, is valued at more than $120 billion. Bill Gates has failed to proceed further from Windows. And Steve, with his mind power, has gifted us with some of the greatest innovations of our time. When the ever struggling and always winning Steve recently, in a function, told Bill Gates that ‘we have more past moments to cherish than deciding on the future road map’, everybody around could easily see tears in the eyes of both long time friends! He gave a very emotional, touching and quite inspiring speech to management students on their Commencement in the Stanford University in 2005. This story of successful entrepreneur is much more exciting than watching a fantasy film, isn’t it? The story is of a young man getting all the glitz and glories in his heydays, losing everything because of dirty corporate games, and again through his own intelligence, coming back to the top! Achievements of Steve Jobs: Year after year and event after event, Steven Paul Jobs, popularly known as Steve Jobs has won countless accolades and laurels for his work and dedication to the revolutionize the IT industry. Whether it was the formal ntroduction of Mac computers to the world in the 70s or the inception of the universal revolution called iPhone in 2007 or the most recent revelation of iPad, Steve Jobs has been iconic in the contributions he has made to computer and internet technology – every reason why he has been ruling the roost as one of the most admired CEOs of the industry. The primary reason being the impeccable success of the Apple iPad tablet that launched early this year which has sold millions of units world-wide till date. The Apple iPad still continues to make waves and is no doubt, treated as a culture medium of comparison for other competing tablet PCs

My Learning Style

This article was downloaded by: [74. 60. 153. 191] On: 14 March 2013, At: 19:04 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www. tandfonline. com/loi/cedp20 Learning Styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures Simon Cassidy a a University of Salford, UK Version of record first published: 05 Oct 2010.To cite this article: Simon Cassidy (2004): Learning Styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures, Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 24:4, 419-444 To link to this article: http://dx. doi. org/10. 1080/0144341042000228834 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www. tandfonline. com/pa ge/terms-andconditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, ystematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.Educational Psychology Vol. 24, No. 4, August 2004 Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures Simon Cassidy* University of Salford, U K Although its origins have been traced back much further, research in the area of learning style has been active for? at a conservative estimate? around four decades. During that period the intensity of activity has varied, with recent years seeing a particularly marked upturn in the number of researchers working in the area.Also of note is the variety of disciplines from which the research is emerging. Increasingly, research in the area of learning style is being conducted in domains outside psychology? the discipline from which many of the central concepts and theories originate. These domains include medical and health care training, management, industry, vocational training and a vast range of settings and levels in the  ®eld of education. It is of little wonder that applications of these concepts are so wide ranging given the centrality of learning? and how best to do it? to almost every aspect of life.As a consequence of the quantity of research, the diversity of the discip lines and domains in which the research is conducted, and the varied aims of the research, the topic has become fragmented and disparate. This is almost certainly how it must appear to practitioners and researchers new to the area, with its complexities and convolutions dif ®cult to comprehend and assimilate. As such, it is perhaps timely to present an account of the central themes and issues surrounding learning style and to consider the instruments available for the measurement of style.This paper aims to provide such an account, attempting to clarify common areas of ambiguity and in particular issues surrounding measurement and appropriate instruments. It aims to bring together necessary components of the area in such a way as to allow for a broader appreciation of learning style and to inform regarding possible tools for measurement. It is anticipated that such an account will promote research in the  ®eld by presenting it as more accessible and by developing a greater appre ciation for the area across disciplines and in researchers and practitioners new to the area.Introduction For some time now educational research exploring the issue of academic achievement or success has extended? rightfully so? beyond â€Å"simple† issues of intelligence and prior academic achievement. There are a number of learning-related concepts, such as perception of academic control and achievement motivation which have been a focus of attention when attempting to identify factors affecting learning-related *Directorate of Psychology, University of Salford, Allerton Building, Frederick Road, Salford M6 6PU, UK. Email: s. [email  protected] c. uk ISSN 0144 ±3410(print)/ISSN 1469 ±046X (online)/04/030419-26 a 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 420 S. Cassidy performance (Cassidy & Eachus, 2000). One concept in particular which has provided some valuable insights into learning in both academic and other settings is learning style. There is general acceptance that the manner in which individuals choose to or are inclined to approach a learning situation has an impact on performance and achievement of learning outcomes.Whilst? and perhaps because? learning style has been the focus of such a vast number of research and practitioner-based studies in the area, there exist a variety of de ®nitions, theoretical positions, models, interpretations and measures of the construct. To some extent, this can be considered a natural consequence of extensive empirical investigation and is to be expected with any continually developing concept which proves useful in gaining understanding of such a crucial and prevailing endeavour as learning.However, the level of ambiguity and debate is such that even the task of selecting an appropriate instrument for investigation is an onerous one, with the unifying of subsequent  ®ndings within an existing framework problematic, at best. This paper do es not seek to achieve an absolute resolve and converge upon the ideal model and measure of learning style, but rather to inform through description and comparison.It is intended as a resource for researchers and professionals who desire a broad appreciation of the area of learning style and who may, previously, have been working with an in-depth understanding but, perhaps, only a narrow awareness of the  ®eld. Riding and Cheema (1991) have previously noted that researchers in the  ®eld of cognitive style/learning style often present only a very limited (if any) account of the variety of theories and instruments which exist for the measurement of style.Whilst educators in all  ®elds are becoming increasingly aware of the critical importance of understanding how individuals learn, it is equally important that any attempts to integrate learning style into educational programmes are made from an informed position. John Yerxa, Education Of ®cer with the Department of General Pra ctice and the Adelaide to Outback GP Training Programme, comments: â€Å"Simply being aware that there can be different ways to approach teaching and learning can make a difference† (Yerxa, 2003).Whilst there may be some truth in such comments, they are not helpful in a drive towards research- and practitioner-based activity which exhibits good awareness of learning style theory and empirical evidence. This paper aims to provide an accessible overview of theories, instruments and empirical work in the  ®eld of learning style. Key Terminology ? And some fundamental issues De ®ning the key terms in this area is not a straightforward task. The terms â€Å"learning style†, â€Å"cognitive style† and â€Å"learning strategy† are? understandably? frequently used imprecisely in theoretical and empirical accounts of the topic.The terms learning style and cognitive style are, on some occasions, used interchangeably, whilst at other times they are afforded sepa rate and distinct de ®nitions. Cognitive style is described by Allport (1937) as an individual's typical or habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering, while the term learning style is adopted to re? ect a concern with the application of cognitive style in a learning Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 421 situation (Riding & Cheema, 1991).Riding and Cheema (1991) go on to describe cognitive style in terms of a bipolar dimension (wholist ±analytic) while learning style is seen as encompassing a number of components which are not mutually exclusive. It is also likely that cognitive style? at the very least? can be regarded as one signi ®cant component of learning style. Hartley (1998) provides the following de ®nitions: cognitive styles are the ways in which different individuals characteristically approach different cognitive tasks; learning styles are the ways in which individuals charact eristically approach different learning tasks.A third key term in the area, learning strategies, Hartley (1998) de ®nes as the strategies students adopt when studying. Hartley (1998, p. 149) continues: â€Å"different strategies can be selected by learners to deal with different tasks. Learning styles might be more automatic than learning strategies which are optional. † This  ®nal point, which attempts to distinguish between style and strategy, re? ects a recurring issue in the area. The â€Å"state-or-trait† debate associated with so many human psychological characteristics (such as personality) is, not surprisingly, relevant here.Learning style may be considered as stable over time (structural)? a trait? or as changing with each experience or situation (process)? a state. Perhaps the more workable view is that a style may well exist is some form, that is it may have structure, but that the structure is, to some degree, responsive to experiences and the demands o f the situation (process) to allow change and to enable adaptive behaviour. The â€Å"motherboard/software† and â€Å"hard/soft† wiring analogies have also been used to describe the interface of style (motherboard/hard wiring) and strategy (software/soft wiring).Investigating the issue of stability in learning style Loo (1997) did  ®nd evidence to support consistency in learning style over time, but was critical of current techniques of analysis and recommended caution in drawing any  ®rm conclusion regarding stability. One  ®nal term worthy of de ®nition here is â€Å"preferences†. A number of authors refer to the favouring of one method of teaching over another (such as group work over independent-study) as learning preferences. The major preferences are fairly well integrated within a number of the models discussed and are often dealt with explicitly by the more elaborate models of learning style.Characterising Learning Style: Simplifying matters The preferred way in which an individual approaches a task or learning situation? their learning/cognitive style or approach or strategy? has been characterised in several different ways based on a variety of theoretical models. Before reviewing these models and characterisations, it may be helpful  ®rst to consider existing attempts at simplifying and categorising current systems along key dimensions (see Table 1). Curry's Onion ModelUsing the way in which learning/cognitive style is measured to propose a layer-like model of learning behaviour, Curry (1983, 1987) utilises an onion metaphor to illustrate inner and outer layers of the construct. Initially proposing three layers, Curry Witkin (1962) Field-dependence/independence Kagan (1965) Impulsivity ±re? exivity Holzman and Klein (1954) Leveller ±sharpener Pask (1972) Holist ±serialist Pavio (1971) Verbaliser ±visualiser Gregorc (1982) Style delineator Kauffmann (1979) Assimilator ±explorer Kirton (1994) Adaption ±innova tionAllinson and Hayes (1996) Intuition ±analysis Kolb (1984) ELM Honey and Mumford (1992) LSQ Vermunt (1994) LSI Entwistle & Tait (1995) Surface ±deep Biggs et al. (2001) SPQ Schmeck et al. (1991) ILP Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser (1978) Conceptual level Dunn, Dunn, and Price (1989) LSI Reichmann and Grasha (1974) Styles of learning interaction model Ramirez and Castenada (1974) Child rating form Reinert (1976) ELSIE Hill (1976) Cognitive Style Interest Inventory Letteri (1980) Learner types Keefe and Monks (1986) Learning style pro ®le Model d d Social interaction d d d Instructional preference d d d d d d d d d Information processing Curry (1987) d d d d d d d d Riding and Cheema (1991) Wholist ± analytic Personality centred d d d d d d d d d Cognitive centred d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d Learning centred Rayner and Riding (1997) d d d d d d d d d d Cognitive personality Table 1. Taxonomy of learning style models Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 422 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 423 ater includes â€Å"social interaction† as a fourth layer. â€Å"Instructional preference† refers to the individual's preferred choice of learning environment. It is described as the outermost layer, the most observable layer and the layer most susceptible to in? uence, making it the least stable level of measurement. Instruments cited as measuring instructional preference include the Learning Preference Inventory (Rezler & Rezmovic, 1981). Social interaction provides the next layer and relates to the individual's preference for social interaction during learning.Reichmann and Grasha's (1974) Student Learning Style Scale de ®nes learners according to their type and level of interaction (independent/dependent, collaborative/competitive, and participant/avoidant). The third and more stable layer is â€Å"information processing st yle† and is described as the individual's intellectual approach to the processing of information. Instruments associated with the measurement of this layer are Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (Kolb, 1976), Cognitive Preference Inventory (Tamir & Cohen, 1980) and Inventory of Learning Processes (Schmeck, Ribich, & Ramaniah, 1977).The  ®nal layer described is â€Å"cognitive personality style†. This appears the most robust component, described as a â€Å"relatively permanent personality dimension ? apparent only when an individual's behaviour is observed across many different learning situations† (Riding & Cheema, 1991, p. 195). Associated instruments for measurement are the Embedded Figures Test (Witkin, 1962), Myers Briggs Type Indicator, (Myers, 1962) and Matching Familiar Figures Test (Kagan, 1965). Riding and Cheema's Fundamental DimensionsHaving identi ®ed in excess of 30 labels used to describe a variety of cognitive and learning styles, Riding and Cheem a (1991) propose a broad categorisation of style according to two fundamental dimensions representing the way in which information is processed and represented: wholist ±analytic and verbaliser ±imager. The wholist ±analytic dimension represents the manner in which individuals tend to process information, either as a whole (wholist) or broken down into components parts (analytic). Quoting Nickerson, Perkin, and Smith (1985), Riding and Cheema describe the wholist ±analytic dimension using commonly associated terms: analytic? eductive, rigorous, constrained, convergent, formal, critical and synthetic; wholist? inductive, expansive, unconstrained, divergent, informal, diffuse and creative. The verbaliser ±imager dimension describes the degree to which individuals tend to represent information as words (verbaliser) or as images (imager). They suggest a number of models of cognitive style which can be subsumed under these dimensions (or families). Table 1 includes examples of these family groupings along with the categorical frameworks proposed by Curry (1987) and Rayner and Riding (1997).Riding and Cheema (1991) make the point that many of those styles identi ®ed do not feature heavily in empirical work and that attention has focused on only a small number of styles. They conclude that whilst there is relatively little research comparing the various styles, they can at least be placed into the two broad categories of wholist ±analytic and verbal ±imagery. The two fundamental cognitive styles exist 424 S. Cassidy independently and are not contingent upon one another; an Imager may be positioned at either end of the wholist ±analytic dimension.Riding (1991) has developed the Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) as an assessment tool integrating the two dimensions. Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Cognitive-Centred, Activity(Learning)-Centred and Personality-Centred Approaches Using Grigerenko and Sternberg' s (1995) discussion of style-based theory and research, Rayner and Riding (1997) consider learning style within the framework of personality-centred, cognitive-centred and learning-centred approaches.There is only limited discussion of personality-centred approaches given, according to Rayner and Riding, its limited in? uence in the area and the existence of only a single model (Myers Briggs style model) which explicitly incorporates personality as a major factor. Cognitive-centred approaches focus on the identi ®cation of styles based on individual difference in cognitive and perceptual functioning. The discussion of cognitive-centred approaches attempts to integrate the earlier work of Riding and Cheema (1991), categorising models according to holist ±analytic and verbal ±imager principles. The discussion revisits models considered earlier by Riding and Cheema and extends to include a number of additional models including Riding's (1991) Cognitive Style Analysis (CSA). The C SA is a computerised assessment tool which identi ®es an individual's position along both the wholist ±analytic dimension and the verbaliser ±imager dimension. The CSA is an example of a model and instrument of learning style which incorporates the two proposed fundamental dimensions of style.Learning-centred approaches are distinguished on the basis that there is a greater interest in the impact of style on learning in an educational setting, and the development of new learning-relevant constructs and concepts, often born out of the utilisation of assessment instruments. Rayner and Riding's subsequent discussion of learning-centred approaches is framed around the distinction between process-based models, preference-based models and cognitive skills-based models.Process models are de ®ned in terms of perceiving and information processing, with Kolb's Experiential Learning Model representing one such approach. Preference models focus on individuals' preferences for the learni ng situation and include preferred time of day for study, temperature, light, preference for group/independent study. Cognitive skills-based approaches are characterised by the desire to apply cognitivecentred models of style to a learning situation. These approaches focus on  ®elddependency, perceptual modality and memory. Further reviews are provided by De Bello (1990) and Swanson (1995).De Bello provides a systematic review of 11 of what he considers â€Å"major models†, selected according to the following criteria: represent a historical perspective; have in? uenced others; re? ect individual practitioners' attempts to identify style; relate to concurrent issues in education; are research oriented; or are widely known in the  ®eld. De Bello presents a comprehensive account of those models reviewed with an evaluative component, making this a useful guide for the selection of appropriate models for work in the area. Swanson's review uses Curry's onion model as a framewo rk forEducational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 425 categorising models and measures according to the outlined component layers of learning style. Swanson's article also provides a relatively rare review of the effects of culture and ethnicity on learning style. Curry's (1987) review is concerned with the psychometric properties of measures of learning style. Her article examines 21 measures of style, focusing on issues of reliability and validity, issues which continue to be raised as a matter of concern in the area (Rayner & Riding, 1997).Whilst each of these reviews offers a slightly different perspective on the topic, the impetus for each of them is the wish to rationalise an area littered with a confusing array of terms, de ®nitions, models, and measures. Theories, Models, and Measures The following discussion of learning style models and instruments is? as is frequently the case? by no means exhaustive. It is, however, fai rly comprehensive and includes descriptions of most of the models at least referred to in recent and signi ®cant review papers (De Bello, 1990; Riding & Cheema, 1991; Rayner & Riding, 1997).The selection process certainly did not centre on identifying models which differed from each other in such a way as to provide alternative perspectives. Rather, the aim is to make a point of reported overlaps between different models in order to make explicit the need for rationalisation in research and practice and encourage readers to identify further similarities. Whilst it would, conceivably, be possible to compile an exhaustive list of instruments, this would probably include many derivatives and adaptations along with a number of instruments without an empirical base and an absence of reliability and validity data.Witkin's Field-Dependence/Field-Independence (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family/ Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Field-dependence/ ®eld-indepe ndence is essentially an individual's ability to disembed in perceptual tasks? likened to spatial intelligence (Widiger, Knudson, & Rorer, 1980)? and is associated with the ability to disembed in non-perceptual problem solving tasks (Riding and Cheema, 1991). Evidence that  ®eld-dependence was also relevant to intellectual ability as ell as a range of other psychological competencies, such as sense of self, has led to the construct being given the broader label of â€Å"differentiation†. As a style it associated with a general preference for learning in isolation ( ®eld-independence) as opposed to integration ( ®elddependence) (Witkin & Goodenough, 1981). Field-independent learners are characterised as operating with an internal frame of reference, intrinsically motivated with self-directed goals, structuring their own learning, and de ®ning their own study strategies.Field-dependent learners on the other hand are characterised as relying more on an external frame of reference, are extrinsically motivated, respond better to clearly de ®ned performance goals, have a need for structuring and guidance from the instructor, and a desire to interact with other 426 S. Cassidy learners. These characteristics will clearly have implications for the preferred learning situation and consequently learning outcomes. Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. andfonline. com Measurement. Tests such as the Embedded Figures Test (EFT), involving the disembedding of a shape from its surrounding  ®eld, have been used to measure the construct. Comments. Although it has stimulated a great deal of research in the  ®eld of education in particular, Witkin's theory is criticised on the following grounds: to generalise performance on perceptual tasks to personality and social behaviour is an over-extension of the theory (Grif ®ths & Sheen, 1992); and that  ®eldindependence? ecause of its high correlations with measures of intelligence (Arthur & Day, 1991)? is a measure of ability as opposed to style and therefore is of little value in the  ®eld of cognitive style. Kagan's Impulsivity-Re? exivity (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. Impulsivity-re? exivity is measured using the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) which requires familiar line drawing of objects to be matched against several possibilities.Individuals who make quick responses after brie? y scanning the alternatives are labelled â€Å"cognitive impulsives† while those who scrutinise each alternative before making a  ®nal decision are labelled â€Å"cognitive re? ectives†. Comments. Of note here is the association reported between  ®eld-dependence/ ®eldindependence and impulsivity-re? exivity with a number of studies reporting signi ®cant correlations between MFFT and EFT scores (for example, Massari & Massari, 1973). Re? ctives are reported as more  ®e ld-independent and impulsives as more  ®eld-dependent (Messer, 1976), indicating a signi ®cant overlap in the two constructs. Convergent-Divergent Styles (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Convergent style is characterised by the generation of the one accepted correct answer from the available information and divergent style as a propensity to produce a number of potentially acceptable solutions to the problem.Measurement. Assessment of convergent thinking is the more straightforward of the two, using standard intelligence tests, multiple-choice items, as well as being inferred from performance on the EFT and MFFT. Because the number of Learning Styles 427 Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com potentially correct answers is used as an index of divergent thinking, tests such as Uses of Objects Test and the Consequences Test are usual methods of assessment.Comments. There are a number of suggested implications here: that certain subject areas may encourage, and therefore reward, convergent over divergent thinking (that is, science-related disciplines); that there needs to be a like-for-like match between teacher and student in terms of preferred style (Hudson, 1966); that, because of the inherent structure and routine in most formal educational settings, divergent thinking proves unpopular with teachers and is discouraged (Getzels & Jackson, 1962).There has been an association drawn between divergent thinking and  ®eld-independence (which is considered to be more creative), given that individuals scoring high on divergent thinking also score high on  ®eld independence (Bloomberg, 1971). Holzman and Klein's Leveller-Sharpener Styles (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Using the degree of complexity with which the individual perceives the task, Holzman and Klein (1954) introduced the sty le dimension leveller ±sharpener.The leveller has a tendency to oversimplify their perceptions of the task, assimilating detail and reducing complexity. In contrast, the sharpener fails to assimilate effectively but instead introduces complexity, treating each piece of detail or event as novel. Assimilation is therefore the dimension de ®ning this particular cognitive style, with levellers and sharpeners being positioned at the extremes of the continuum. Measurement.The â€Å"failure to assimilate† characteristic is demonstrated by the Schematising Test which requires the individual to judge the size of a series of squares of light which get progressively bigger. The tendency is to underestimate the size of previous squares judged against the current larger squares. Whilst levellers show a particular sensitivity to this effect, sharpeners make more accurate estimations as a consequence of failing to assimilate current and past events (squares of light). Comments.Whilst th ere is relatively little work utilising the leveller ±sharpener cognitive style (Riding & Cheema, 1991), Riding and Dyer (1983) were able to identify similarities between this style and  ®eld-dependence/independence. Pask's Holist ±Serialist Style (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Interestingly, Pask (Pask, 1972; Pask & Scott, 1972) makes the point that Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com 428 S. Cassidy hilst both groups operate through a different process for learning? in the end? both groups achieve a similar level of understanding. Serialists operate a step-bystep approach to learning, choosing to deal only with small amounts of information or material at any one time before going on to link these steps and achieve understanding. Holists on the other hand will utilise signi ®cant amounts of information from the start, looking to achieve understanding by identifyin g and focusing on major patterns or trends in the data.The serialists perceive the learning task in terms of a series of independent discrete topics and issues and focus on developing links between them, but for holists the focus is on the task as a whole. Pask observed the relative characteristics of serialists and holists as: serialists? stepby-step, logical linear progression, narrow focus, cautious and critical leading to a tendency to fail to see the task from a global perspective; wholists? broad perspective and global strategies resulting in a tendency to make hasty decisions based on insuf ®cient information or analysis. Measurement.Pask and Scott (1972) devised a series of problem-solving tasks which allowed individuals to adopt either a step-by-step or global approach to solving the task. Individuals adopting a step-by-step strategy to test simple hypotheses were labelled as serialists while holists were those individuals who attempted to reach a quicker solution by test ing more complex hypotheses. Comments. Riding and Cheema (1991) point out that despite being widely accepted, the dimension is based on only a relatively small sample and has not bene ®ted from any empirical work examining its association with other learning styles.Notwithstanding these comments, Pask (1976) did report that holists scored higher on the Analogies Test and Divergence Test than serialists, suggesting possible similarities with the convergent-divergent style dimension. Pavio's Verbaliser ±Visualiser Cognitive Style (Verbaliser ±Imager Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. The assertion that individuals have an habitual propensity to process information either verbally or imaginally emanates from dual coding theory (Pavio, 1971) and may have important implications for learning.The verbaliser ±visualiser cognitive dimension is assessed through tests examining individuals' ability to generate information not present but dependent upon the presence of a spontaneous image (Riding & Taylor, 1976). Individuals capable of responding quickly are considered visualisers and those with slower response rates verbalisers. Evidence exists to support the notion that, whilst the ability to switch between modes exists, some individuals rely heavily on one or other mode (Riding & Cheema, 1991).The fact that individuals have preferences for either visual or verbal thought has implication for learning. Alesandrini (1981) reported that the tendency for visualisation was inversely related to science and verbal analytical Learning Styles 429 ability, while the generally reported  ®nding is that verbalisers learn best from textbased material and visualisers from pictorially presented material (Riding & Buckle, 1990). This suggests that a mismatch between learner and mode of presentation will adversely affect performance.Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Gregorc 's Style Delineator (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Gregorc (1982) describes four distinctive and observable behaviours: abstract, concrete, random, and sequential tendencies. A combination of these tendencies is indicative of individual style. These tendencies are, Gregorc believes, re? ective of in-born predispositions but individuals need to be capable of functioning outside their natural style.Four learning styles are identi ®ed: concrete sequential, featuring direct, step-by-step, orderly, sensory-based learning; concrete random, featuring trial and error, intuitive and independent approaches to learning; abstract sequential, featuring analytic, logical approaches and a preference for verbal instruction; and abstract random, featuring a preference for holistic, visual, experiential, and unstructured learning. Measurement. The Style Delineator is a 40-item self-report inventory involving the rank ordering of sets of words.The format is similar to that of Kolb's (1976) Learning Styles Inventory and it has been suggested that observation and interviews should be used alongside the instrument to assist in the identi ®cation of learning style and preferences (De Bello, 1990). The measure identi ®es an individual's learning style according to Gregorc's model. Comments. Rayner and Riding (1997) argue that the wholist ±analytic dimension of cognitive style is present within Gregorc's model. Kaufmann's Assimilator ±Explorer Style (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / CognitiveCentred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model.The assimilator ±explorer cognitive style (Kaufmann, 1979) de ®nes style in terms of an individual's propensity to solve problems through either novel or familiar strategies. The style was developed around problem-solving behaviour and has a close association with the use of creativity. Measurement. A-E style is measured using a 32-item self-report questionnai re developed by Kauffmann and Martinsen (1991) in which individuals are scored according to their level of apparent desire for novelty (denoting explorers) or familiarity (denoting assimilators) in cognitive function. 30 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Kirton's Adaption ±Innovation Style (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Grounded in an assumption that cognitive style is related to creativity, problem solving and decision-making strategies as well as aspects of personality, Kirton (1994) argued that style develops early in life and remains stable over both time and situation. Kirton introduced an adaption ±innovation dimension along which cognitive style could be measured ith adaptors characterised by the desire to do things better and innovators by the desire to do things differently. Measurement. A-I is assessed using the Kirton Adaptor ±Innovator Inven tory (KAI), a 32-item self-report instrument developed for use with an adult population with both workplace and life experience. Seen as a measure of problem-solving style and creativity, the KAI is in frequent use in the  ®eld of management and training. Allinson and Hayes' Intuition ±Analysis Style (Wholist ±Analytic Style Family / Cognitive-Centred Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model.The Cognitive Style Index was developed by Allinson and Hayes (1996) in an effort to operationalise cognitive style for use in the area of management. It focuses on the dimension of intuition versus analysis which, Allinson and Hayes argue, represents a superordinate dimension of cognitive style. Hemispheric asymmetry underlies the dimension, with right brain orientation characterised by intuition with a tendency for rapid decision making based on feeling and the adoption of a global perspective. Left brain orientation is characterised by analysis where decisions are a result of logic al reasoning focusing on detail.Measurement. The CSI is a 38-item self-report questionnaire which provides a score suggestive of either an intuitive or analytic nature. Kolb's Experiential Learning Model (ELM) and Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Processed-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Kolb (1976, 1984) proposes a four-stage hypothetical learning cycle. Individuals will show a preference for or will cope with some stages better than others and learning is seen as a continuous, interactive process.The four stages of the ELM are described as: concrete experience (CE; experiencing) which favours experiential learning; abstract conceptualisation (AC; thinking) where there is a preference for conceptual and analytical thinking in order to achieve understanding; active experimentation (AE; doing) involving active trial-and-error learning; and re? ective observation (RO; re? ecting) where extensive consideration is given to the task and potential so lutions before there is any attempt at action. The four learning orientations form two orthogonal bipolar dimensions of learning. Educational Psychology 2004. 4:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 431 The  ®rst dimension is prehension? the grasping of information from experience? and is constituted by the bipolar orientations CE ±AC. The second dimension described is transformation? the processing of grasped information? and is constituted by the remaining orientations AE ±RO. Relative positioning along these dimensions de ®nes the learning styles described by Kolb as convergence, divergence, assimilation and accommodation. The individual who adopts a convergent approach uses abstract conceptualisation to drive active experimentation.Action is based on abstract understanding of the task and projected strategies for successful completion of the task. Divergers combine re? ective observation with concrete experience to devise an often creative soluti on. Divergers are often described as creative learners because of their propensity to consider multiple potential strategies for learning and problem solving. Assimilators, concerned primarily with the explanation of their observations, favour abstract conceptualisation and re? ective observation. As such, assimilators seek mainly to re ®ne abstract theories rather than develop workable strategies and solutions.Lastly, Kolb de ®nes the accommodator. Using active experimentation and concrete experience, these individuals have a clear preference for hands-on learning. The accommodator has been described as having a tendency for prompt action and a noted ability for adapting to diverse situations (Lynch, Woel? , Steele, & Hanssen, 1998). Measurement. Originally developed as a 9-item self-report scale (Kolb, 1976), the revised LSI (Kolb, 1985) is a 12-item self-report questionnaire. Respondents are required on each of the items to rank four sentence endings corresponding to each of the four learning styles.LSI scores re? ect an individual's relative emphasis on the four learning orientations and enable categorisation according to the corresponding learning style. Two combination scores measure an individual's preference for abstractness over concreteness (AC ±CE) and action over re? ection (AE ±RO). Comments. Assertions that the styles outlined by Kolb will be associated with student performance have been borne out in a number of studies where, for example, convergers perform better on conventional examinations involving concrete answers (Lynch et al. , 1998).Despite such support, studies examining the psychometric properties of the LSI have raised concerns regarding its reliability and validity (Freedman & Stumpf, 1981; Geiger, Boyle, & Pinto, 1992; Geller, 1979; Newstead, 1992; Sims, Veres, Watson, & Buckner, 1986). Kolb's emphasis on experiential learning and the developmental nature of learning suggests a potential for change in style (Rayner & Riding, 1997). Studies which have examined stability and change using the LSI present a mixed picture. Low test-retest reliability statistics and changes in style classi ®cation reported by Sims et al. 1986) are countered by reports of exceptionally high test-retest reliability of 0. 99 found by Veres, Sims, and Locklear (1991). Although also reporting high test-retest reliability 432 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com statistics, Loo (1997) is cautious about them, believing that inappropriate statistical techniques may be masking individual changes in style in favour of group effects. The ELM forms the basis of the work of Honey and Mumford (1986) in the  ®eld of learning style and management and the development of their Learning Styles Questionnaire.Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles Questionnaire (Learning-Centred ProcessedBased Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Honey and Mumford's (1992) description and measureme nt of learning style is grounded in Kolb's experiential learning model, with styles closely corresponding to those de ®ned by Kolb. The Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ) was developed for use with management trainees and has been proposed as an alternative to Kolb's LSI. The four learning styles measured by the LSQ are: activist (Kolb's active experimentation); re? ctor (Kolb's re? ective observation); theorist (Kolb's abstract conceptualisation; and pragmatist (Kolb's concrete experience). Measurement. The LSQ is an 80-item self-report inventory based on Kolb's ELM but developed speci ®cally for use in industry and management. Individuals' tendency towards a preferred learning style is indicated by their ratings of behavioural and preference orientations. Comments. Although developed for use with management trainees, the LSQ has been used in a range of settings including education.However, concerns regarding the psychometric qualities of the LSQ have been raised. Duff and Duf fy (2002) report a failure to support the existence of either the bipolar dimensions or learning styles proposed by Honey and Mumford and found the LSQ to have only modest levels of internal consistency (ranging from 0. 52 to 0. 73 for the four style subscales). Given that their sample was 388 undergraduate students, Duff and Duffy conclude the LSQ is not an acceptable alternative to the LSI and that its use in the  ®eld of higher education is premature.Vermunt's Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Processed-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Vermunt (1992) describers the concept of learning style in terms of: processing strategies, including an awareness of the aims and objectives of the learning exercise used to determine what is learnt; regulation strategies, which serve to monitor learning; mental models of learning, encompassing the learner's perceptions of the learning process; and learning orientations, described as personal aims, intentions and expectations based on past experience of learning.Based on these strategies and orientations, Vermunt derives four learning styles: undirected, Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Learning Styles 433 where there is dif ®culty in assimilating learning material, coping with the olume of material and prioritising the importance of components of the material; reproduction, where little or no effort is made to understand but instead information is reproduced to complete the task or achieve the minimum required standard; application directed, which is characterised by the application of learning material to concrete situations in order to gain understanding; and lastly, meaning directed learning, which involves attempts to gain a deeper understanding of learning material and to draw on existing and related knowledge to achieve critical understanding.Vermunt's Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) was developed as a diagnostic tool for use in a h igher education context. Measurement. The degree to which each of the four styles is favoured is assessed using Vermunt's LSI (Vermunt, 1994). The LSI comprises 20 subscales and 120 items relating to study strategies, motives and mental models. Individuals respond to statements along a  ®ve-point scale according to the degree to which the statement is descriptive of their behaviour or the extent to which they agree with the statement.Comments. Vermunt's (1992) own reports of acceptable reliability and validity of the LSI received some support form Busato, Prins, Elshout, and Hamaker (1998) who con ®rmed the existence of four factors corresponding to learning styles described by Vermunt. The in? uence of Kolb, Honey and Mumford, and Entwistle and Tait (see below) all seem present in Vermunt's approach to the assessment of learning styles. Entwistle et al. ‘s Approaches to Study Inventory (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style)Model. Based on earlier work by Marton and Saljo (1976) Entwistle, Hanley, and Hounsel (1979) developed an instrument for assessing learning style which focuses on the level of engagement or depth of processing applied during learning. The proposed model centres around four modes of orientation of the learner: meaning orientation; reproduction orientation; achieving orientation; and holistic orientation. Tendencies towards particular combinations of orientations identify individuals as conforming to one of he following learning styles: deep (intention to understand, relating ideas, use of evidence, and active learning); surface (intention to reproduce, unrelated memorising, passive learning, and fear of failure); strategic (study organisation, time management, alertness to assessment demands, and intention to excel); and apathetic (lack of direction and lack of interest). Measurement. The original 64-item ASI has undergone a number of revisions, its most radical in 1994 when it was abbreviated to 38 items, and then to 44 items in 434 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. om 1995 (Entwistle & Tait, 1995). The revised ASI (RASI) is a 44-item self-report inventory of learning activities using a Likert scale response format. The RASI now identi ®es six approaches to learning: deep approach; surface approach; strategic approach; lack of direction; academic self-con ®dence; and metacognitive awareness of studying. Comments. The ASI inventory has been used extensively in educational research and a recent study examining the psychometric properties of the RASI and its utility in an educational setting recommends its continued use for educational management and research (Duff, 2000).Biggs' Study Processes Questionnaire (SPQ) (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model and measurement. Entwistle's model was further developed by Biggs (1985) to incorporate an extended motivational dimension de ®ned as intrinsic, extrinsic and achievement orientation. Bigg's study processes measure includes both a strategy dimension? deep/surface? and a motivational dimension? deep/surface. Measurement. Originally a 42-item self-report questionnaire, the revised two-factor SPQ (Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001) has 20 items and provides scores in relation to strategy (deep/surface) and otive (deep/surface). An overall composite score is indicative of a consistently deep or surface approach to learning. Achieving approach is no longer separated out as in earlier versions. Schmeck's Inventory of Learning Processes (ILP) (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Schmeck et al. ‘s (1977) learning processes style construct is developed around the belief that it is the quality of thinking during learning which affects the learning outcome.Like the models proposed by Entwistle and Biggs, the learning process model follows the work of Marton and Saljo (1976), fo cusing on learning orientations with an emphasis on information processing (Duff, 2000). The four subscales of the ILP are: synthesis ±analysis; elaborative processing; fact retention; and study methods (Rayner & Riding, 1997). Measurement. The ILP was originally a 62-item self-report inventory with the four subscales identi ®ed above. A revised version (ILP-R) has 160 items and seven subscales (Schmeck, Geisler-Brenstein, & Cercey, 1991).However, each version of the ILP has come under heavy criticism and Richardson (2000) concludes that the ILP cannot be recommended for use in investigating student learning. Learning Styles 435 Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Hunt et al. ‘s Conceptual Level Model (Learning-Centred Process-Based Approach / Information Processing Style) Model. Hunt, Butler, Noy, and Rosser (1978) described learning style in terms of an individual's need for structure and the conditions under which that individu al will learn most effectively.Students requiring a highly structured learning environment, who are impulsive and concrete, are described as having a low conceptual level (CL). High CL students are independent, inquiring, self-assertive, and have little or no need for structure. The aim of the model therefore is to match students' learning style with the most appropriate methods of teaching. Measurement. The Paragraph Completion Test requires individuals to complete and elaborate on six incomplete sentences.Because responses are scored according to their degree of complexity, scoring and interpretation of the test requires specialist training (De Bello, 1990). Comments. Suedfeld and Coren (1992) reported an association between conceptual level and divergent thinking and support the existence of the construct as a cognitive style rather than a mental ability. Some evidence for the validity of the CL model was presented by McLachlan and Hunt (1973) who found that low CL students showe d signi ®cant bene ®t in their learning from a high as opposed to a low structure teaching method.It was also reported that teaching method did not impact signi ®cantly on learning in high CL students. In line with such  ®ndings, Hunt believes that although teaching needs to be geared towards students' learning style to facilitate learning, there may be a developmental component to style which would allow for teaching methods to become gradually less structured to encourage more independent learning. Dunn et al. ‘s Learning Styles Inventory (LSI) (Learning-Centred Preference-Based Approach / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction)Model and measurement. Dunn, Dunn and Prices' (1989) LSI is a 100-item selfreport questionnaire asking individuals to respond to items relating to the key factors of the construct: environmental (light, sound, temperature, and design); emotional (structure, persistence, motivation, and responsibility); sociological (pairs, peers, adults , self, and group); physical (perceptual strengths: auditory, visual, tactile, kinaesthetic, mobility, intake, and time of day); and psychological (global-analytic, impulsive-re? ctive, and cerebral dominance). Versions of the scale have been developed for use with primary and secondary school children and with adults (the Productivity Environmental Preferences Survey). The factors are reported independently to provide pro ®les which can be used to guide the construction of the learning situation, material and teaching approach. 436 S. Cassidy Comments. Curry's (1987) review of different learning/cognitive style models reports the LSI as having one of the highest reliability and validity ratings.The LSI has also been identi ®ed as being practitioner oriented and the most widely used assessment for learning style in elementary and secondary schools (Keefe, 1982). Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Riechmann and Grasha's (1974) Style of Learning Interaction Model (LearningCentred Preference-Based Approach / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction) Model. Described as a social interaction scale (Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993), the style of learning interaction model focuses on learner preferences but introduces social and affective dimensions to the measurement of style.The three dimensions described by the model are: avoidant-participant; competitive ±collaborative and dependent ±independent. The model incorporates the belief that style is, to some degree, ? uid and will alter according to the learning situation. Measurement. The Student Learning Styles Scale (SLSS) is a 90-item scale presented in two versions, one to assess class style and one to assess individual style. Comments. Rayner and Riding (1997) note the similarity between the style of learning interaction model and the model proposed by Dunn et al. (1989) because of the focus on learning preferences.Ramirez and Castenada's (1974) Child Rating For m (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style / Instructional Preference / Social Interaction) Model and measurement. The model incorporates the cognitive style dimension  ®eld-dependence/ ®eld-independence (Witkin, 1962) and focuses particularly on cultural differences and minority groups. Field-independence is viewed as positive because its associated traits (detail orientated, independent and sequential) are those which Ramirez believes are rewarded by schools.The Child Rating Form is a direct observation tool measuring behaviour frequencies which is completed by teachers or can be completed as a self-report questionnaire by the student. The Edmunds Learning Style Identi ®cation Exercise (ELSIE) (Reinert, 1976) (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model and measurement. Described as a form of assessment which aims to â€Å"provide the teacher with information which will be used to work to the s tudent's strengths or preferred mode of responding to learning stimuli† (Rayner & Riding, 1997, p. 9), the ELSIE aims to identify the individual's natural perceptual modality in the context of a learning situation. The 50 one-word items of the instrument assess Learning Styles 437 response in terms of imagery, verbalisation, sound, and affect. Similarities between ELSIE and several other models including those of Dunn et al. (1989), Hill (1976) and Keefe and Monks (1986; the NASSP-LSP) have been noted. Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. comHill's Cognitive Style Interest Inventory (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. De ®ning learning style in terms of the unique way in which an individual searches for meaning, Hill (1976) used a process of cognitive style mapping, attempting to establish perceptual modality (auditory/visual), modalities of inference (such as critical thinking and hypo thesis testing), and cultural determinants in order to integrate learning style with curriculum design. Hill labelled the resulting construct â€Å"educational cognitive style†.Measurement. The Cognitive Style Interest Inventory is a 216-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess educational cognitive style using the following categories: symbols and their meaning (perceptual modality); modalities of inference; and cultural determinants. There is also an interview component to the measure. Comments. The instrument itself suffers from a lack of empirical support (Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993), poor reliability and validity (Curry, 1987) and has been criticised for the elaborate and time-consuming nature of the instrument (De Bello, 1990).De Bello (1990) draws comparisons between Hill's model and both Ramirez and Castenada's (1974) model, because of the identi ®cation of cultural differences, and Dunn et al. ‘s (1989) model because of the in? uence of peer and fami ly orientation. Letteri's Learner Types (Learning-Centred Cognitive Skills-Based Approach / Cognitive Personality Style) Model. Viewing learning essentially as information processing involving the effective storage and retrieval of information, Letteri (1980) was concerned with the diagnosis of ineffective cognitive processing and advocated interventions teaching effective cognitive skills.The model identi ®ed three types of learner: Type 1 is re? ective and analytic; Type 3 is impulsive and global with a lack of direction; and Type 2 falls midway between Types 1 and 3 in approach to learning. Letteri provided evidence linking Type 1 learners with above average and type 3 learners with below average academic success. Measurement. Letteri's instrument represents a number of existing cognitive dimensions, including  ®eld-independence/ ®eld-dependence, impulsivity ±re? exivity, 438 S. Cassidy scanning/focussing and levelling/sharpening, which are assessed through a series of bi polar continuums.In general, bipolar extremes correspond to either wholist (global) or analytic characteristics. Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Keefe and Monks' (1986) Learning Style Pro ®le (Learning-Centred Cognitive SkillsBased Approach / Cognitive Personality Style, Instructional Preference and Social Interaction) Model. Keefe and Monks' (1986) Learning Style Pro ®le (LSP) was the result of extensive re-examination of existing learning style models with the aim of developing a single instrument capable of assessing learning style across the range of already established characteristics.The LSP assesses style in three areas: cognitive skills, including information processing and memory; perceptual response to visual and auditory stimuli; and study and instructional preferences, including motivation and environmental preferences. The model is intended for use in the development of educational programmes and focuses on the developm ent of effective cognitive skills for learning. Measurement. The LSP is a 126-item assessment tool for secondary students which includes self-report items and cognitive tasks (derived from the EFT).Responses are computer scored and provide students with an individual learning style pro ®le. Comments. Not surprisingly, given its origins, the LSP has been found to correlate signi ®cantly with other instruments, most notably Dunn et al. ‘s (1989) LSI and Reinhart's (1976) ELSIE (Curry, 1987; Keefe & Monks, 1986). Commenting on these reported correlations, De Bello (1990) notes Curry's (1987) concerns regarding the reliability and validity of ELSIE. Learning Styles in Action? Some Examples Interest in de ®ning, characterising and studying the associated effects of learning style results? ainly? from its distinction from ability and its association with performance. Whereas the relationship between ability and performance is relatively straightforward, such that performance i mproves with increased ability, the effects of style on performance are contingent on the nature of the task. For example, imagers are likely to perform better on pictorially-based tasks than on verbal-based tasks (Riding, 1997). In support of the independence of learning style and intelligence, Riding and Pearson (1994) found that there were no signi ®cant correlations between intelligence? s measured by the British Abilities Scale? and the wholist ±analytic and verbal ±imager dimensions of learning style. A less clear distinction between learning style and personality is presented (Riding & Wigley, 1997), although only a tentative link is reported. The identi ®cation of an individual characteristic, separate form Learning Styles 439 ability, which impacts on learning performance has led to the application of learning style theory and measurement in a number of diverse areas. Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. andfonline. com Academic Achievement Cassidy and Eachus (2000) used the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (Tait & Entwistle, 1996) to measure learning style in undergraduate students. They found that academic achievement was positively correlated with a strategic approach, negatively correlated with an apathetic approach, and unrelated to a deep approach to learning. Learning style was also found to correlate signi ®cantly with other academic performance-related factors such as academic self-ef ®cacy and academic locus of control.Clinical Training in Medical Schools McManus, Richards, Winder, and Sproston (1998) found, in a large-scale prospective study of two cohorts of medical students at a London medical school, that the students' learning styles, but not their  ®nal examination results, were related to the amount of knowledge gained from clinical experience. Using an abbreviated 18-item version of the Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987) they reported positive correlations between strate gic and deep learning styles and amount of knowledge gained from clinical experience. Career DevelopmentIn reviewing weaknesses in current practices within industry towards the retention and development of individuals labelled as â€Å"high ? yers†, Bates (1994) lists learning style as one key factor. Bates cites Honey and Mumford's (1986) model of learning style as an appropriate model for individual learning and one capable of encompassing a framework for high ? yer development. In the move to cultivate the â€Å"top managers† of the future, Bates calls for individual learning styles to be taken into account through the provision of a variety of learning situations which should create the opportunity for the development of a full range of styles.Police Training In a review of existing methods of police training in the U. S. , Birzer (2003) criticises traditional behavioural approaches in favour of instructional methods which recognise individual differences in learni ng. Citing recent studies identifying individual approaches to learning, Birzer illustrates the paradoxical way in which much police training is currently delivered with little regard for individual differences in learning, and calls for a more student-centred approach to training in the future.These examples illustrate the range of potential applications of learning style and underline the need to promote clari ®cation and rationalisation in the  ®eld. 440 S. Cassidy Educational Psychology 2004. 24:419-444. downloaded from www. tandfonline. com Working with Learning Style The researcher or practitioner entering the area of learning style may well do so with some sense of trepidation given the volume, diversity and apparent dissociation of writing, theory and empiricism in the  ®eld. De Bello (1990) notes that there exist almost as many de ®nitions as there do theorists in the area.For the academic concerned with pure theory this may offer an exciting

buy custom Assessment of the Role of Silence in Business Interactions essay

buy custom Assessment of the Role of Silence in Business Interactions essay Silence influences either negatively or positively in the field of communication. It can make or break relationships, create discomforts and tensions, or lead to peace and calm. Silence can denote either yes or no. The apparent silence is not really a void it is a powerful means of communication; you are sending out a message to the other one through your clothes, facial expression changes, and even the way one is sitting this all indicate boredom, interest, animosity, or indifference. Even without making any efforts, the volumes of information pass to and fro through silence. Silence is the opposite of talking. But it is not negative it is not omitting out anything in communication. Silence does not become a barrier to communicating (Panko, R 2009). Silence is a vibrant tool for the communication in business. Business is basically a deal involving money and goods transactions that will ultimately benefit both parties as well as the community. With both parties trying to squeeze out the maximum tempers might easily get frayed. But a good businessman knows that growling is received from nowhere. Here silence is invaluable as it leaves the issue pending and unanswered, and yet a message is conveyed being more powerful than blunt words (Applbaum 2004). Communication may be either verbal or non-verbal. Under the latter, facial expressions, postures, gestures and voice tone are included. These are the important tools in business interactions. A small businessperson can use it for getting across a message or to interpret a message that has been received. Sometimes, however, the non-verbal communication contradicts with the verbal one in a sense that silence is more evocative and truer than the string of words. A study provided by Herta A. Murphy together with Herbert W. Hilderbrandt has noted this in Effective Business Communication. In fact, from 60% to 90% of the gist of content can be conveyed through the silent clues. Hence, the importance of silence in business communication should not be overlooked but given due its importance (Andrad 2004; Mitchell 2004; Stafford 2004). In the non-verbal communication, three elements are present the appearance, the body language, and sounds (not words). As with the oral communication, in the non-verbal interaction the appearance has an impact on the dress code, make up, grooming, hairstyle, etc.; this could play its part in drawing the attention of the listener. The dcor of the room too will have a telling effect on those people listening (Barr 2000). The body language, in particular facial expressions, can convey direct messages that the verbal part of communication will not be able to give. The expressions flitting across the face show up the hidden emotions that could be in contradiction with the spoken words. Gesturing and posturing as well are the important conveyers of messages; they are being more evocative than words. For example, a manager speaking with his feet on the table could indicate confidence and determination, while an employee leaning forward on the table to listen could mean that he or she is interested. However, the continuous use of gestures and postures could be distracting and disturbing while betraying nervousness (Berkovitch 2006; Narayanan 2006). Thirdly, the non-verbalsounds play an important part in interaction: the tone, the rate, and the volume of voice and even laughter clearing of ones throat or humming can be communicative by its nature. The effect of scent and physical contact like the pressure during a handshake can speak volumes silently. The total silence can convey a gap in understanding and even some harsh feelings, while discussing face-to-face (Chamberlain, K 2009). People rarely think that failing to act is a kind of communication. The non-verbal communication, unlike the verbal one, is not organized. Currently, the studies are being carried on the information dispatched through the non-verbal means. Communication means the transferring of information from one person to another one. The majority spends nearly three fourths of their waking time communicating their thoughts, knowledge and view points to others. Many fail to note that the bulk of this transfer is through some non-verbal means and not through writing or talking (Benton 1994). The silent way of communicating is through an eye contact, the voice tone modulation, posturing, etc. It also refers to the clothes one chooses to wear or the silence that is intentionally kept. The non-verbal cues, while interacting, are given more importance than the verbal ones. For instance, a person might wish you to be well but the expression in his eyes does not say so; his clenched fists belie his animosity although words may be honey coated (Chamberlain, K 2009). Silence is often beneficial while interacting in business circles and at workplaces. Attention is drawn invariably to the silent person during his speeches. Silence can control anger; and this is vital in the business world where emotions have to be tempered while handling deals and difficult situations. Silence represents a passive dissent although no direct challenge is thrown (Chamberlain, K 2009). Silence can be used not to greet an unwelcome intruder without being explicit. By being silent the astute businessman can avoid a topic without commitment. Silence can cut a short irrelevant chatter that wastes the time. Silence can indicate that the subject is a taboo. To be a top grade leader of the team, the manager has to successfully interact with other members. Silence is one such methods of communication (Foss, NJ 2005). Distance is a factor. The gap between one person and the other one signifies either attraction or a status depending on the milieu or the cultural background. Orientation is another factor. It means how the one is presented frontal, sideways or sometimes showing a rear portion implying volumes. For instance, cooperators sit side by side while competitors sit facing each other. Posture is another point to note. One may slouch, while the other one may be sitting or standing erect. The crossing of legs and arms akimbo also convey emotions. This communication sends the message of formality or relaxation during the exchange of communications (Mason, M 1999). Physical contact is vital. The shaking of hands, the pat on the shoulders, the embrace, the pushing back all are laced with the inner language. It conveys either an intimate feeling or a sense of rejection. Then, there are the all powerful facial expressions, the smile, the frown, the raised eyebrow, the yawn and the sneer. Duuring the interaction, the facial expressions keep continually changing, and the recipient constantly notes it. Across global cultures, the facial expressions more or less convey the same type of meaning. The movement of hands conveys its meaning as well (Berkovitch 2006; Narayanan 2006). Some of the meanings are specific to certain cultures, while others like the clenched fist have a universal connotation. The importance of eye contact cannot be over emphasized. The eyes are the windows of the soul. They convey interest, indifference, boredom, hatred, or warmth (Andrad 2004; Mitchell 2004; Stafford 2004). Kinesis or body language is one of the best ways to gauge the managerial potential of the executive. It is more important to note what he is doing rather than listening to what he is saying. This is an analysis of movement. If one extends a hand straightly during the interview, or if one leans forward, then the person can be a good operator for any organization that requires the injection of energy to bring about a radical change (Galbraith 2000). While shaking ones hands if one stands up straightly then the person is good at selling whether himself or the company in which he is employed. If, while talking, the person occupies extra space with moving around the arms, then he is both good as an informer and listener. Such an individual will be ideal for an organization that needs a change in the direction it is leading (Panko, R 2009). Many are now learning to rehearse these movements to make an impression but when there is the disharmony between the facial expression and the limb movement the cat gets out of the bag and the trick is exposed. Spacing is an important factor. Those higher up in the ladder will keep a bigger gap and will keep to the improved protection of the territory; they will not have any difficulty in invading the territories of those lower ones in the rung of the ladder (Mason, M 1999). Silence can be communicated through the environment tables, chairs, desks, bookshelves, and the like drawing into its ambit the design of the office. Some cut up the office into impersonal and personal areas. This betters the purpose for which the particular space is utilized. The size of the desk, for instance, indicates the status and the position of any user. The window numbers, the carpet quality and the wall paintings all silently convey a message. Another factor is how long the one is being silent. How much time do you need to allow your staff to speak; how long will you keep them waiting, and do you stick to the time-schedule? In a healthy business atmosphere, there is a balance among all these elements (Foss, NJ 2005). In conclusion, it should be noted that many find silence as oppressive and rush in with uncalled for the words to fill such kind of void. Thus, it is better to say nothing if you have nothing to say rather than rattling like an empty vessel. But it is the silence of Socrates when he said he did not know anything that cost him his life. Thus, we see that silence is not a vacuum but pregnant and poignant with its meaning much more than the empty vessels making a lot of noise. The executives in the corporate sector are now becoming more and more aware of the significance of silence through the non-verbal communication. They are engaging professionals into the field to do the analysis. Buy custom Assessment of the Role of Silence in Business Interactions essay

Free Essays on Genetics

Genetic counselors are health professionals with specialized graduate degrees and experience in the areas of medical genetics and counseling. Most enter the field from a variety of disciplines, including biology, genetics, nursing, psychology, public health and social work. Genetic counselors work as members of a healthcare team, providing information and support to families who have members with birth defects or genetic disorders and to families who may be at risk for a variety of inherited conditions. They identify families at risk, investigate the problem present in the family, interpret information about the disorder, analyze inheritance patterns and risks of recurrence, and review available options with the family. Genetic counselors also provide supportive counseling to families, serve as patient advocates, and refer individuals and families to community or state support services. They serve as educators and resource people for other healthcare professionals and for the general public. Some counselors also work in administrative capacities. Many engage in research activities related to the field of medical genetics and genetic counseling.... Free Essays on Genetics Free Essays on Genetics Genetic counselors are health professionals with specialized graduate degrees and experience in the areas of medical genetics and counseling. Most enter the field from a variety of disciplines, including biology, genetics, nursing, psychology, public health and social work. Genetic counselors work as members of a healthcare team, providing information and support to families who have members with birth defects or genetic disorders and to families who may be at risk for a variety of inherited conditions. They identify families at risk, investigate the problem present in the family, interpret information about the disorder, analyze inheritance patterns and risks of recurrence, and review available options with the family. Genetic counselors also provide supportive counseling to families, serve as patient advocates, and refer individuals and families to community or state support services. They serve as educators and resource people for other healthcare professionals and for the general public. Some counselors also work in administrative capacities. Many engage in research activities related to the field of medical genetics and genetic counseling....

What is Competition Free Content (According to CoSchedule)

What is Competition Free Content (According to ) Content marketing is competitive, crowded, and cluttered. Everyone is clawing for the same people’s attention, but there’s only so much to go around. In the end, the people who find their competition-free content niche will win out. So, what is it? Check out the video, where I explain. Competition-free content is about boiling the principle of differentiation into your content marketing strategy. The principle springboards from a business concept I learned from a book called, Blue Ocean Strategy. In the book, authors W. Chan Kim and Renà ©e Mauborgne describe the two different oceans in business: a red ocean and a blue ocean. The red ocean is bloody with competition. In these waters, you’re competing with many companies for the same customers via the same methods. Everyone’s begging for attention in existing markets. Growth becomes slow, if not outright stagnant. This is a brutal scenario for marketers, and one most of us work in today. It’s a sea of high competition, low differentiation. Contrast that picture of the red ocean with a blue ocean. These are clear, competition-free waters. It’s a place where unique approaches stand out because no one else can compete. In fact, finding the blue ocean renders competition irrelevant. The extreme upside is that you can capture new demand by doing your best work because you swim in your own waters. Regular content marketing is just like swimming in the red ocean. It’s filled with noise, thrashing, and fierce competition. Everyone’s begging for the same audience’s attention- and they’re doing the same things to get it. They’re simply trying to swim faster than the rest. This is what gives us a market bloody with competition and yielding stagnant growth. You will find your blue ocean through â€Å"competition-free content.† It’s the first step in the 10x Marketing Formula because, without it, even the best content faces diminishing returns. Competition-free content is content that adds tremendous value to your customers and audience that only you can produce. It’s content that stands out through topic, structure, or media type. And it renders competition irrelevant because this is uncontested space. A Blue Ocean In Higher Education This is where you create stuff that stands out while being impactful and meaningful. Here’s an excerpt from my upcoming book  that describes what it looks like in the wild: When the American Civil War ended on May 9, 1865, the country entered the era of Reconstruction. Much of the U. S. was in shambles; including the economy. However, a major shift was taking place: movement from a primarily agricultural economy to an industrialized one. Peirce College capitalized on this shift. The college was founded in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to help returning soldiers transition into the emerging industrial economy. They needed education and training that was both practical and affordable. And that’s what Peirce delivered, enrolling 550 students  in its first year. Over the coming decades, however, Peirce shifted its focus from veterans to the traditional 18-year-old student. By the late 1980s, Peirce College was treading water in a sea of similar schools. They were simply another college offering the same things to the same people as everyone else. Then came Arthur J. Lendo in 1991, Peirce’s new president. Lendo led the school back to its focus on a group of potential students with few alternatives. Rather than claw for the attention of traditional students, the college pivoted to a focus on adult learners, military personnel, and prospective foreign students. To reach this audience, they began offering bachelor degree programs in three venues: on campus, on-site in different cities, and online. No longer was their non-traditional audience limited to associate’s degrees from community colleges. Now they had the chance of earning a four-year degree. In the first year, they beat online enrollment forecasts by 300 percent. And over time, overall enrollment nearly tripled. Notably, the average age of a Peirce student rose from about 21 to mid-30s. How To Find Your  Competition-Free Content Niche In Three Steps Peirce College’s story is an excellent illustration for how marketers can position themselves today. So, how can you find your competition-free content niche? To find your competition-free content niche, start with this three-part framework: look, research, and strategize. It’s the simple trifecta anyone can do, regardless of budget or time constraints. Look At The Competition The first step is to observe your competitors by surveying the landscape and dissecting what kind of content they’re creating. Are they running ads like crazy on TV, radio, billboards, and other traditional channels? Are they working digital angles like Facebook ads, giveaway contests, video, or email marketing? Do they have engaged audiences on blogs or social channels like Pinterest, Instagram, or Twitter? This step is about taking a critical look at the market and diagnosing strategies and tactics like a scientist. You should ask: what content resonates most, and least, with your ideal customers? This is where you can start to find the cracks and avenues into creating competition-free content. Research Their Content After tracking your competitive landscape, it’s time to head to Google for some simple research beyond channels and into content. You’ll search for terms related to your products and look at the top ten search results. You’re looking for two main things: What is consistent about their content? What most prominently stands out? Answer questions like: How long is my competitor’s content? How many images doe they use? Do they use strong calls-to-action? What are the quality of their customer testimonials? Are there product sales attracting lots of attention nationally, regionally, and locally? By asking questions like these, you can analyze the content landscape. In fact, you can even create a spreadsheet to keep track of these data points for a high-level view of what everyone else is creating. Even this level of simple research will make finding your competition-free content niche far easier than simple guesswork. Strategize Your Competition-Free Content Now that you have researched the content and methods your competition is using, you can create her competition-free content strategy. (AKA: The fun part.) However, competition-free content isn’t simply creating content that’s different- it’s about creating content that’s different and that your team can execute well. The path to finding that niche is asking and answering these questions. What’s in it for our customers? This question, about the others, should be your primary guide. Ultimately, the tactics you use won’t matter to your customers. They don’t care if they find valuable content from you or from somewhere else. They care about the message and how it directly benefits them.This is often called a â€Å"What’s in it for me?† (WIIFM) statement.  You need a compelling answer to this question that you can communicate clearly.Additionally, notice I said â€Å"customers† and not simply â€Å"audience.† It’s vital to keep your paying and most profitable customers in mind. Your competition-free content niche is not simply meant to build a following. Its sole purpose is to drive growth and yield positive financial results. To attract more of your brand’s ideal customers, you must focus on creating and communicating value specifically tailored to them. What is our team really good at? Understanding what your team can do better than anyone else is important at this stage. You’re looking for something that’s both different and that you can execute well. What are our competitors doing that’s similar? Next, what patterns is the industry falling into that are like your team’s strengths? These are opportunities to disrupt them and stand out. They’re also guardrails to avoid red-ocean competition. Are there people in your customer base or audience your content underserves? Next, there may be customer and audience segments key to growth you aren’t serving well. You’re dissecting two segments: who is already a customer, and who is following your brand online. If there are critical customers or prospects your content is neglecting, this is a huge opportunity to course correct. What has your team created already that you’re proud of? Finally, are there things you’re proud of because they’ve worked well and you can uniquely create at an elite level? These are things you know your team can consistently execute well. These stages are the quickest path to finding your competition-free content niche. Their power is the singular clarity they bring to both your strengths and the competition you face. Get Started On Your 10x Marketing Formula Journey If you want to achieve 10x growth, but you don’t want to wait until my book comes out in early 2018, you can get started right now. For free. Get in on the early access list  for exclusive content like thought-leader interviews more pre-publication insight into the formula. access to our private 10x marketing LinkedIn group. and the first chapter of the book sent straight to you. See you on the other side!