Foreword: How to Win Friends and Influence People

I used to loath self-help books. I thought they were simple, benign, asinine, not rigorous, and a waste time. I included business books in this category; narrations of common knowledge that for some reason are presented one-thousand different ways.

That was my attitude for a long time; I was a Classical musician and a staunch academic. I thought I was important, cultured, fiercely intelligent, and different from the rest. Then I grew-up. I realized that my perceived self-importance was just that, perceived. I thought I had figured things out when other’s had not; I thought that I was smarter than the rest; I thought I was more talented; I thought I felt more when others did not feel...I thought a lot of things.

After a series of challenges and setbacks that I would call failures, I learned to take things as they presented themselves and to not discount pretty much anything. The dreams of my sixteen year-old self had changed and in many ways, become more realistic and grounded. During my decade of challenges I obtained an MBA from University of Phoenix Online and I started to be open to new ways of thinking that were very different from my previous experiences.

One of those different ways of thinking was the concept of networking and soft skills. As a musician, I assumed my talent would speak for itself and because I was also a ‘nice’ person networking would take care of itself. I was wrong. As I have discovered, networking is one of the most important skills they do not teach you in college. Some people are just good at it, some develop their skills, some learn from their parents, some struggle, and some discount its importance.

I really started thinking about networking and self help business books when a series of colleges around the country considered teaching these books as college courses, usually as humanities credits. At most locations these courses have not been implemented; lack of rigor of the source material, inability to fill a semester of learning with one book, and the lack of solid academic thought in proposing these ideas, but the ideas of teaching college students these ideas are dead-on.

And this brings me to one of my favorite business self-help books, How to Win Friends & Influence People. In my past life I thought this book was a joke without even reading it, but after I did I quickly appreciated it. Like many business books it is a series of concepts/ideas/principles that are supported by stories from the author’s perspective. The book is light, 250 pages in large font and is easy to read with few references or extended citations.

Over the next few articles, I will look at the principles covered in How to Win Friends & Influence People and explain why every person in Higher Education, from tenured professors, to adjuncts, and administrators need to read this book.

As I analyze this book I will post one question: If this book is so simple, why doesn’t everyone follow its principles?

Song/Week: “Say it Ain’t So,” Sarah Blackwood ft. Emily Bones (Weezer cover)

As someone who was a young adult in the late 90s I loved Weezer. Nerd-rock exemplars! When I discovered Walk off the Earth I soon found Sarah Blackwood’s YouTube channel and this version of “Say it Ain’t So” with Emily Bones. To put it mildly, this is the best cover of this this song ever! Two chill gals playing a Weezer song, a cat sleeping at their feet, and a distorted ukulele.

Enough said...enjoy!

Family Choices

Jointly written by #anonyousbjorn and #anonymous-sarah

In a recent article at Vox, Ezra Klein looked at a viral video about the job of being a mother and how the United States stacks up to the world in relation to paid time off when having a baby. The article started with the viral video from cardstock.com that for everyone who has children watched and nodded knowingly and for those who do not have children, did not see. Beyond the cute introduction the bulk of the article went into the very real policies that the US has when it comes to having babies and working.

When a family has a child, when comparing to other countries around the world, the US does not have mandated paid leave for mothers, no mandated paid leave for fathers, no mandated paid vacation days, and no mandated paid sick time off. Bleak. The article does not address the fact that many companies do offer benefits that include paid leave for mothers, paid leave for fathers, paid vacation days, and paid sick time off.

The video addressed in the Vox article is a bit troubling in that it attempts to provoke by comparing the role of parenting to that of a paid position. Parenting is no more a job than the role of wife, husband, partner, daughter, brother, et cetera. It is a relationship that carries profound responsibilities, but it does not easily compare with labor for which compensation should be expected, and all of the policies meant to keep employment fair (number of hours worked, proscribed rest periods, minimum acceptable working conditions). People don’t have children to foster a self-employment opportunity and if they don’t know initially that having a child is time and resource intensive, they are set straight pretty fast.

Klein, from the Vox article, perpetuates the “job” terminology when she draws our attention to the fact that many (most!) mothers are income earners in some capacity, and in 40 percent of households are the primary income earners. The title of the article asks “Why do we treat mothers this way” in reference to the lack of policy and paid leave support in the U.S. in comparison to the rest of the developed world. If we decide we want better parental leave policies, we need to broaden the conversation to the positive impact that more comprehensive leave policies would have on the household (dads, partners, other kids,the household economy).

Not noted in the article is the fact that in many of the countries topping the list with the most favorable leave policies instituted these policies to encourage population growth. In countries such as Japan, Denmark, and others the pressures to counteract population decline makes generous family leave policies a relatively easy one. But the U.S. still is not in a period of population decline and no easily identifiable broad economic incentive exists that would lead us in that direction.

In the meantime, while policies are debated and nothing changes in the U.S., working while having a family for women and men comes down to family choices. Do both parents work? How are household chores divided? If one is going to be employed less than full-time who should it be? What types of financial sacrifices can be made?

These questions can only be answered by the parents and whatever policies exists, let it be the government's or a company’s policy can make answering these questions easier or harder.

Song/Week: “Burn,” Postmodern Jukebox (Ellie Goulding cover)

I heard about Postmodern Jukebox on NPR a little while ago and finally remembered to find them on YouTube. Wow! First, they are crazy talented from the leader of the group, Scott Bradlee, to the excellent singers, and all of the instrumentalists.

Without saying too much I will let Scott Bradlee speak for himself:

"Growing up as an aspiring jazz pianist, I wasn’t interested in listening to anything that might appeal to those that I deemed to possess a less than refined palette of musical taste."

“What I found is that, despite my initial aversion to the stuff I was hearing, I was unable to truly categorize this as ‘bad music’ without first defining a set of arbitrary, culturally-defined criteria."

"My goal with Postmodern Jukebox is to get my audience to think of songs not as rigid, ephemeral objects, but like malleable globs of silly putty. Songs can be twisted, shaped, and altered without losing their identities–just as we grow, age, and expire without losing ours–and it is through this exploration that the gap between 'high' and 'low' art can be bridged most readily."

Good writer, excellent points, and great music!

Each song that Postmodern Jukebox performs is in a different style from mariachi, to 20s New Orleans Jazz, 60s Doo-Wop, R&B from every decade, 40s swing, et cetera. Each song is brilliant with great arranging, solid musicianship, loads of creativity, and a good touch of humor.

I am highlighting “Burn” originally performed by Ellie Goulding but to get the Postmodern Jukebox experience you have to plugin and start listening.

Guest Author: Not Enough IRBs by anonymouscharity

Apparently there are not yet sufficient numbers of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in this country. While doctoral learners and other researchers are busy completing hours and hours of ethics training from organizations like the CITI Program, submitting and resubmitting (often in numerous iterations) to their institutions’ (IRBs) just to ask a few survey questions, grossly unethical government-funded medical research goes forward, targeting some of our most vulnerable populations.

It’s recently come to light that a research study published in 2010 about oxygen treatments for prematurely-born infants used unbelievably unethical approaches to target poor minority populations in places like Alabama, gain parental consent for participation with nothing that even closely resembles informed consent, administer a purely randomized oxygen treatment to preemies that disregarded the patients’ medical indications, and even misrepresented patient information to medical personnel so they would not discontinue inappropriate treatments in response to the babies’ reactions.

“It’s not unethical when the government does it,” wrote Glenn Reynolds sarcastically. Sharyl Attkisson shared a number of anecdotes from parents whose children were likely negatively affected by their participation in this study. Her piece provides a strong analysis of this egregious situation. The parents report the ways that the study’s “SUPPORT” name misrepresented the intent, how they were never informed of the true nature of the study, and how they were encouraged to participate as a means of gaining better treatment for their babies, even though the study had very little connection to providing improved care to those particular study participants.

While I was going around and around with my institution’s IRB over extensive confidentiality requirements for a 5-question email survey to fully informed, consenting, volunteer adults about school practices, this study was going forward doing real harm to the most vulnerable in our society, on the taxpayer dime (to the tune of $20.8 million). Apparently the Federal government needs a better IRB.

Correct College Pricing?

Ah, Jeffrey Dorfman. In my earlier article, Respectfully Disagree about Big Time College Sports I disagreed with Dr. Dorfman and his view of how much college football players are compensated. In a recent article about how much college costs, I largely agree with Dr. Dorfman views but respectfully disagree with a few of his details.

Before I start, I want to reiterate one of my biggest complaints about higher education writers; they all seem to focus on an ideal college experience that largely consists of the Ivy League, Baby Ivies, Ivy equivalents, or expensive liberal arts colleges. Everyone seems to do it; writers for The Atlantic, Forbes, The New York Times, and Inside Higher Ed., and The Chronicle are often biased by their own educational experiences when discussing all of higher education.

Back to the article. Dr. Dorfman’s article covers a lot of ground when it comes to how much college costs and he starts off with the beta topic of higher education, acceptance rates (alpha is cost). I have already written about acceptance rates and they tell you nothing about what type of learning occurs at an institution. Dr. Dorfman relates acceptance rates to supply and demand and that tuition at those schools are fairly priced and could even be higher. I agree!

If Williams wanted to charge $93k a year, Claremont McKenna $90k a year, Harvard $84k a year, and Princeton $80k a year for undergraduates (double current tuition), go for it! the reality is that the students who want to go to these schools will pay for it, aid will cover it, or they will figure out a way to come up with the money. I think it is a good idea because places like this will truly become the haute couture of higher education, they can continue to act like only the best and brightest attend, and their exclusivity will be solidified.

I also agree with Dr. Dorfman that supply and demand needs to be better applied to higher education; all institutions in higher education need to be grounded in solid business practices while following economic principles that the private sector follows. Colleges and universities cannot constantly grow and the growth that many experienced during the 80s and late 90s is gone. Programs and departments need to follow supply and demand (for the most part) and need to have funding not only for the short-term but also long-term.

Next Dr. Dorfman goes after federal loans as a contributor to to skewed college pricing. I agree that aspects of financial aid and federal loans have had a major unintended consequence when it comes to higher education (besides fraud). As Dr. Dorfman stated, “either way, more federal aid ends up bringing colleges more money rather than yielding savings for students and their families.”

In my view, the federal aid problem is health care light. When my wife and I had our son we had no idea how much it would cost because our hospital could not tell us; they had to submit the bill and then insurance would pay part of it with us left to cover the rest. This is bunk. You cannot shop around because no one can give you a straight answer. Higher education is similar to health care but not nearly as bad but that does not mean that it is good. Serious reform needs to occur because college pricing is bunk.

Finally my favorite quotes from Dr. Dorfman’s article.

“Students who expect to pursue careers that are not high paying would likely be better served by attending lower-priced public colleges. Students who would need to incur large student loans to attend a private college should carefully consider public education options.”

I agree; solid advice.

“Critics, just like students, need to remember that the public option is out there.”

This is my favorite quote from Dr. Dorfman’s article. To me this implies his circle of peers all went to the Ivy League or Ivy equivalents. For the majority of students out there, and I mean the vast majority of the millions of students out there, “the public option” is the only option. By having a statement like this shows a disconnect with the typical American family that wants their children to go to college but not have $50k in debt afterwards.

American families struggle to pay/help their kids with college because:

1. Median household income is $53.3k;

2. They still have to save for retirement;

3. They have to pay down other debts (own college loans, mortgage, et cetera.);

4. Multiple children.

All families want to help their children within reason but a median household income can only go so far. ‘Critics’ and writers who write about higher education are the ones that need to remember the public option.

“As long as affordable options are out there, why should we be concerned if there are also expensive choices? Nobody thinks that cars are unaffordable because Mercedes has a model that costs $100,000. College is not unaffordable because Harvard, Stanford, and other top schools are expensive. Students have plenty of other college options. Just as not everybody can buy a Mercedes, students should choose a college that they both love and can afford.”

I agree; who cares about Harvard, Stanford, and the like. Let the rich and the super motivated go to those schools and become titans of their fiefdoms while the majority of students go to those other schools, including community colleges that higher education writers seem to brush over constantly.

Guest Author: Hands by anonymousdaisy

I have always believed that the hands are extensions of the soul. They are powerful examples of the true collective mind. Hands can lead another to salvation, or damn ourselves and others to the eternity of regret. They are extended in kindness or raised in anger. Because of this our hands show our honest nature and cannot hide our truths. When hands die, the mind starts to die as well. Eventually the body follows and all we are left with is the eternal consciousness.

I think the only part of me that shows my age is my hands. People say you are only as old as you feel. Truth be told my body feels  centuries old on a daily basis, but others tell me I look much younger than my age. Except my hands, like the Portrait of Dorian Gray, have paid the price of life. Thankfully, my hands are aged by helping more than hurting. I don't deny they have hurt others terribly,  have lied, stolen, destroyed and hit. My hands have also prayed, fought, created, held on and let go. It's a great deal of responsibility for such a small part of the body.

My hands are stronger than life and their age holds no embarrassment.

(Picture taken by anonymousdaisy.)

anonymous-daisy works at the same Phoenix area for-profit higher education institution as anonymousbjorn.

Song/Week: “Feist sings 1, 2, 3, 4” by Feist

Ever since I became  a father I have become very familiar with children’s television; PBS, Disney, and everything else. PBS, and especially Sesame Street is a godsend; educational programming that is entertaining and appropriate for all kids (Dinosaur Train is also quite good).

One of my favorite songs sung by a star on Sesame Street is “Feist sings 1, 2, 3, 4.” This version, along with 4 monsters, 4 chickens, and 4 penguins dancing is adorable! Along with being one of the most viewed Sesame Street songs on YouTube is also has a curious Like and Dislike ratio; 40k Likes to 11k Dislikes (May 2014). This seems like an awful lot of Dislikes for a song that is simple, benign, and super-cute (maybe that is why parents do not like it, it is not educational enough).

A short yet accurate comment explains the high number of Dislikes, “The people who disliked this video also dislike puppies, candy, fireworks, and joy.”