A. Situational Interest as a Reading Interest Level Competency In 2010, Linnenbrink-Garcia, et al. concluded that situational interest had statistical significance in terms of predicting change in individual interest across the school year and improves individual interest. Results from the study of Rotgans and Schmidt (2011) also revealed that situational interest was highly predictive for observed achievement-related classroom behaviors and academic achievement. As an example, Lerkkanen et al.’s (2012) study results revealed that children showed more interest in reading and mathematics among classrooms where the teachers placed greater emphasis on child-centered teaching practices than on teacher-directed practices. Schraw, Flowerday, and
For example, she taught us about the MBTI and Strong Interest Inventory assessments. I did these assessments online and the reports I got back on them basically told me about the kind of person that I am and what my interests are. The MBTI assessment told me that I focus my attention on the outside world, I take in information through the senses, I make decisions based on my values, and I deal with the world with a flexible, open-minded approach. The Strong Interest Inventory suggested careers I may be successful in as well as information about my interests. Most assuring to me in my report was seeing mathematics as my highest interest and investigative as my predominant theme, as I feel that I am a strong student in math and a highly curious individual who likes to seek out facts.
He even went on to classifying these feelings of inferiority to the level of energy you have, which then relates to your level of social interest. The first type being the ruling type, from childhood they tend to be rather aggressive and dominant over others. According to their level of energy, the ones with a lot of energy are the ones that hurt others, including bullies. Other with low energy hurt others by hurting themselves, for example suicides. The second is the leaning type, they are often very protective of themselves.
Alfred Charles Kinsey brought homosexuality into the public forum. Alfred Charles Kinsey and his colleagues enquired detailed questions regarding research participants sexual backgrounds, with these results Alfred Charles Kinsey published two books: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). From these research findings Alfred Charles Kinsey and his colleagues Wardell Pomeroy and Clyde Martin created The Kinsey Scale (also known as the Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale) in 1948, in order to account for the research findings that showed people did not fit into neat and exclusive heterosexual or homosexual categories (“The Kinsey Institute – Kinsey Sexuality Rating Scale,” n.d.). The publics’ reactions ranged from admiration and gratitude to horror and disgust. Some proponents believed that Alfred Charles Kinsey’s work would benefit humanity because increased knowledge of our sexual natures could only improve people’s lives, while opponents called the research ungodly and amoral (“The Kinsey Institute – Kinsey Sexuality Rating Scale,”
While the investigative and artistic made sense, I was surprised by social, specifically the characteristic of ‘highly verbal’, as I tend not to be. However, the social category is also called ‘The Helpers’, which I can associate with. The juxtaposition of the Investigative category’s ‘prefer to work independently with minimum supervision’ and the Social’s ‘prefer to work with others’ was ironic, but, oddly enough, I notice myself shifting between those two ends
To make the idea more clear the author has quoted a saying of a Social Psychologist Susan Fiske in the article, which says, “People pay attention to those who can control their outcomes.” (Tatum, B. D. (2000). The complexity of identity: “Who am I?.”, page 4, paragraph 3) Unequal power shifts the focus of subordinates towards survival. And as we have already understood, dominants decide for the subordinates, thus, subordinates tend to change their ways according to the dominants. We can find a large number of examples where subordinates tend to develop self-doubt and self-hate and attempt to do things like Black people trying to use different products for lightening their skin, women trying to copy men in order to look like them
(Rayman and Atanasoff, 1999). Holland articulated that most people, in our culture can be classified as one of six dominant types-Realistic(R), Investigative(I), Artistic(A), Social(S), Enterprising(E) and Conventional(C). An individual’s personality can be assessed by considering his/her most dominant type and find career related behavior. (Miller and Miller, 2005) A three letter code can be generated (E.g-SIA,CES) to signify one’s career interest. The first letter of the code is a person’s main interest themes, which would play a significant role in career preference and contentment.
Conventional: They are the people who love dealing with work on the basis of data and detail and are termed as 'ORGANIZERS '.Such people are systematic in their approach and therefore, prefer well-ordered environments. They tend to avoid ambiguous situations and problems. Such people are conscientious, efficient, practical, and identify themselves with power. Also, they are adverse to free, unsystematic exploratory behavior with new ideas. The conventional people are conservative buyers and most effective at well-defined tasks.
People like former Education Secretary, Arne Duncan are “concerned about testing too, but he has written he "strongly believes" in annual tests as an educational tool” (Kamenetz). Although some people see standards as a positive incentive, students and teachers suffer from the repercussions of standardized testing. Additionally, others also believe that data enforces progression and reform. LaTasha Gandy, supporter of standardized testing, believes that because of standardized testing, data shows who is falling behind and struggling. (Gandy).
Social relations examination (Kenny and La Voie, 1984) was associated with data from 51 2-parent, 2-tyke families. A rising sociological approach to manage the self-thinks manages power, reflexivity, and social constructionism. The standard of social advancement is essential to both new and standard sociological approaches to manage the self and assistants most recent observational examinations. Promising heaps of research are clear in work that explores the sociological setting of self-improvement, the social resources used in the advancement method, and the creating centrality of nonhuman inquiries in self-advancement. (Kenny and La Voie,