Ted Talk Response #5 Chimamanda Adichie

1.     1. My immediate take-away from this video was how Adichie used the phrase, “A single story,” to describe, in a sense, ignorance and one-sided views of people, culture, and the world.  What she said made sense to me. She talked about how we are so vulnerable, especially as children. We may be introduced to this idea that everyone looks and acts a certain way, and this idea is not true. Her personal stories used as examples were evidence of how this idea, this perception, can change someone’s life and view of themselves. Adichie talked of how she would write stories of foreign characters, because those types of characters are what she had been exposed to. She talked about viewing literature as never being able to connect to herself… and what a horrible thought! One of the greatest things about literature is its ability to show ourselves in it, so we can identify and relate to characters and events, so that we can learn. She talked of how she discovered African literature, and how it changed her perception of herself. This is what literature does – it changes our minds, alters our views, and provokes thought. I believe that it is vital for each and every person to appreciate who they are and the differences, and similarities, between them and others. It is commonly said that one must be able to love themselves before they love someone else, before someone loves them. With Adichie’s personal stories – and the way in which she found herself – this common thought seems to make more sense. Adichie’s examples drive her points further – people are not always what they are perceived to be.

2.    2.  Adichie possessed effective speaking techniques. One noticeable technique was her ability to speak calmly and evenly while still holding the audience’s attention. Since she told stories, it was vital that she was able to peak an interest in the audience but also articulate her personal experiences effectively. It was also noticeable that the way in which she spoke was controlled by her ultimate goal for her presentation – to tell her stories in the way in which she would naturally tell them, the way they would come to her. As it is her experience, and her story, and therefore should be told by her true voice. It was obvious that Adichie used her voice.

3.    3.  I found Adichie’s presentation style to be extremely effective – due largely in part to its simplicity. Like I mentioned above, she told her story, so it was of extreme importance that it was told in her voice, using her methods. Adichie presented in a simple manner – one that was not distracting nor overwhelming. This was effective due to what she was presenting – her story. In addition, Adichie included quotes from other adventurers and authors. This evidence that was provided helped to deepen understanding of her point.

4.    4.  This video matters. Points were discussed that are of paramount importance to ourselves as human beings – how we must look beyond what we are told, investigate and decide for ourselves what kind of person someone is, or what kind of person we are. We must not assume that a person consists of one thing. In truth, we, as humans, are made up of an unimaginable number of things – things that may change with time and experience. This matters to the world, to education, and to ourselves, because as we grow and develop and enter and interact with the world and everything in it, we need to be able to look beyond a label, a title, a word… and figure out the truth for ourselves. We also need to be able to love ourselves. Without both abilities, how will we live? We must broaden our horizons and realize that we are all humans. We must embrace our differences and strive to learn and encounter other people and other cultures. We cannot possess a restricted point of view – for we may be drastically wrong. Adichie, in addition to others’ single stories, talked of her own possession of a single story. This is important, so as to realize that many people are guilty of possession of a single story.  She also mentions that stories, though may of the same topic, are told differently due to the storyteller, the listener, the point of view, the time the story is told, etc. Hearing these stories, all different, yet the same ones, deepen our understanding of an event or situation and encourage us to avoid making the single story the only story.

Ted Talk Response #4 Clay Shirky

1.     My take away from this video was ultimately, the possibilities one has with free time. Shirky made the point of putting this free time to work on projects. What projects? Projects that people participate in together, projects that affect people. According to Shirky, there are 1 trillion free hours every year in the world. He encourages us to work on projects. One may counter this argument with the tremendous amount of hours one may spend being busy. Why fill the leftover hours with more work? Shirky, when discussing cognitive surplus, or time that may be devoted to working on projects, split the concept into two categories – communial and civic. Communial cognitive surplus was defined as time devoted to projects that are created by the user and for the users. Shirky’s example was wall cats. Personally, I find these to be stupid and ridiculous, but to many, they provide a free chuckle and entertainment. This is, of course, probably not seen as a real issue – as communial cognitive surplus is fun, easy, and for each other. However, I suppose it could be viewed as an issue when compared to the other category of cognitive surplus – civic. Civic cognitive surplus is defined as free time devoted to projects created by a person that are designed to give back to a society as a whole. Shirky provided the example of Ushahidi – an informational site. Wall cats were created for the person – for the person. Ushahidi was created by the person – for the society. It might appear that civic cognitive surplus is, in a sense, more generous and beneficial, as it gives to the whole of society and provides information. Wall cats are… wall cats. However, one must consider the impact of a laugh upon a person. The ability to laugh and the ability to have fun gets us through life. I had never thought of free time in the way that Shirky presented it. It makes me think – with free time, should one work on projects that always affect others directly? A group project? Is it alright to do something that you like to do… by yourself, and for yourself? Is it not possible to affect others indirectly using this method?

2.     Shirky didn’t appear to have many effective speaking techniques to me. However, he did present with a loud voice. This is essential not only to be able to have the audience hear, but also to get the concept communicated to the audience. Shirky also gestured a great deal. Personally, I was a bit distracted by the amount of gesturing. It is possible that the audience could have been distracted as well – therefore lessening the chance that the concept was absorbed. I did not notice any other major speaking techniques demonstrated by Shirky. This could have contributed to my confusion of the talk.

3.     This Ted Talk was quite difficult for me to understand. I only grasped the whole of what Shirky was saying towards the end. This may have been partly due to Shirky’s presentation style. As soon as the presentation started, I noticed that Shirky started immediately presenting factual information. In turn, I immediately found myself confused and lost. Shirky did not begin with an introduction of any sort. I had no idea what he was talking about for the majority of the presentation. I believe that if he had begun with an introduction saying what, exactly, he was going to talk about, I could have had a greater understanding and appreciation for his talk. I also thought that many informational aspects included in the presentation didn’t contribute to a whole idea. I often wondered why some concepts were included. It seems a bit disorganized. One aspect of his presentation style, though, I found to be somewhat helpful… he used visual aid. I am a visual learner and I found it helpful to view some of the things he discussed. For example, I probably would have never fully grasped the aspect of Ushahidi if not for the provided visual examples.

4.     Although I had difficulty understanding Shirky’s presentation, I believe that certain valuable points can be taken from it and applied to life. After viewing the talk, I thought about free time, and what people choose to do with it. I realized that the reality of what people do with their free time today is quite unfortunate, in my opinion. It seems that people, especially young people, are spending their time consumed by technology and mindless activity rather than human interaction and activity that causes one to think. I believe that Shirky’s idea of devoting free time to group projects is worthy of consideration. Not only would projects be actually doing something, group projects may even be more productive because of the amount of people working on it and the amount of people affected. This may result more ideas, effort, and work. I believe that this matters to me, education, and the world, because as technology advances, the need for human ability seems to decrease, resulting in laziness and absence of depth of thought. I believe that things should exist because they matter and because they provoke thought. It is incredible what results from thought. Whether it be in a group or indivdual, whether it be communial or civic, I believe that devoting free time to something that matters may change the world. 

Ted Talk Response #3 Daniel Pink

1.     One of my major take-aways from this video is how I had never thought of some things Pink talked about in the way that he did. I had never thought of business in a way that can be summed up with “if you do this, then you get that,” and it makes sense! In a connection to my previous blog post reflection on “Price of Happiness,” it seems that the only reason some people do jobs that they might not enjoy is due to the rewards. To me, there is so much wrong with that reality. I agree with Pink when he says that motivation should be by the means of intrinsic methods. Lately I have been thinking, and I have actually realized that things should get done because we believe them to be important, and because we care about them. It just makes sense to me. I had also never thought of the outcome of having an “if-then” situation. Pink explained that having such a situation would narrow the field of what would be produced. This makes some sense to me. Regardless of whether it is right or wrong in my mind, however, is beside the point. I think that this idea is of value. Could it be true that when a clear destination is put in front of you and a shiny reward sparkles in the folds of your mind that the product will be within boundaries? Maybe if we are so set on receiving the prize, we will succeed. However, if we merely think of what will happen if we complete the task, rather than how we complete the task, the result might be proficient, but not advanced, so to speak. If we get it done, we get the reward – no matter the quality or depth of the product. It’s because our focus is just on getting it done, rather than the opportunities and possibilities that come with being handed a task. On another note, I did not completely understand the candle problem. It makes sense in the way that in order to succeed, one may need to expand the boundaries of possibilities, rather than immediately lean toward the expected conclusion. Pink mentioned that everyone had their own version of the candle problem. This made sense to me without even having to completely understand it. I am, however, trying to figure out what is my candle problem. I’m suspecting a have a few. It’s also quite interesting that scientific results showed that the higher the incentives, the more poor the performance. I’m thinking this may have to do with the fact that the mind is so overwhelmed and so consumed with getting it right, that it may miss the point overall.

2.     Pink has effective speaking techniques. One of the most notable is the change of the sound level of his voice. Often times during his presentation, Pink’s voice would suddenly raise, and in addition, his gestures would increase. It is almost impossible to cease to realize that he cares about what he talked about – which, actually, was the whole point of his presentation overall. In addition, he sometimes laughed at himself and the points he was making to the audience. This seemed to be effective to me, primarily because it gave me the feeling that he believed so much in what he said that he couldn’t believe it. I knew he enjoyed it. When it is obvious that a speaker enjoys what they talk about, the audience has a desire to understand and feel the joy of the concept.

3.     Pink’s presentation was aided with visuals and of typed information. This was extremely effective when describing the candle problem, as such a situation might be better to imagine when provided with a visual. In addition, scientific data collected about motivation, rewards, and results was typed and presented in simple terms to the audience. This enabled the point to be read and most likely, for visual learners in the audience, understood. I have found it helpful for somewhat complicated results or concepts to be simplified and put in front of me, as I then remember it better. Also, Pink used a hint of story and creativity in his presentation – he pretended he was a lawyer. He referred to the audience as the “ladies and gentleman of the jury,” and closed with “I rest my case.” This method brought comedy into the presentation and appeared to be clever. The use of the acting, or story, may have been of aid to members in the audience. By presenting as a “lawyer,” Pink essentially told the audience that he took his idea as seriously as a lawyer would her case – with a twist of humor.

4.     What I feel mostly matters in this video is the idea that things should be doen because they matter and that they are cared about. I have actually realized that things should get done because we believe them to be important, and because we care about them. This might be one concept that I completely believe, because in all the world, in all that is possible to do, I become extremely overwhelmed. However, thinking of it in these broader terms, looking beyond the facts, I feel that I am at peace with what I know. This concept is vital to education and to the world because, once again, people live their lives. They fill the world. If things are happening only because the person expects something in return, what does that teach our children, and how does it impact the way in which we interact with one another and form relationships? What would happen to the however apparent nature of humans to do things because it matters? On another personal level – scientific results showed that the higher the incentives, the more poor the performance. I’m thinking this may have to do with the fact that the mind is so overwhelmed and so consumed with getting it right, that it may miss the point overall. For example, I become overwhelmed easily. Sometimes I have to slow down and stop worrying about everything I want to get done in order to do it. Sometimes when I make myself relax prior to tests, I do well. I believe that we need to think about what is possible instead of what we get, and we need to think about why we do the things that we do.

Ted Talk Response #2 Benjamin Wallace

Price of Happiness

1. My take-aways from this video are, of course, how ridiculous some things in the world are. Examples of real life material objects that were presented by Wallace astounded me. The title, "Price of Happiness," combined with the examples provided by Wallace really made me wonder - is that what it takes to be happy? The higher the price, the higher the happiness? If this is the reality... it is extremely saddening. One would wonder of the roots of happiness and what causes true, real, happiness, and hopefully people would come to mind. Friends and family, people one cares about are what causes happiness - or what should. It is so unfortunate to face the fact that people think of money when they think of happiness, rather than the people who surround them - yet I know there are people like this. Mrs. Cornils told us in class of a friend she has that lives in Texas. Apparently he has a car for each season, and in the garage there is a mechanical hand that takes off the roof of the Jeep. Each member of the family has their own media room, and each child (there are two) has their own nanny. However, then Mrs. Cornils said that she knows for a fact that she loves her job way more than her friend loves his. This really affected me - this idea of doing what you love. If you do, at the end of the day, I wonder: wouldn't you rather be truly happy and love what you do, or would you rather have enormous amounts of material things, and not love what you do? To me, this question is a no-brainer. To someone else, the answer might look quite different. And some might have to ponder this question for a while. I admit that many people would not see a problem in buying ridiculously priced items - the more expensive, the better! With today's media - movies, television shows, and magazines all documenting celebrities and fame, there is a common feeling that one might need to be rich to be happy. I have felt confusion and frustration concerning the subject. However, if asked the question that I asked above, I know that my mind might wonder to extravagant, expensive items - but I also know that the center of myself would ultimately answer for me - a conclusion having to do with love and happiness, not material goods. This is comforting to myself. In addition, the statistics mentioned by Wallace at the end of his presentation hit me, but did not necessarily surprise me. People, when faced with wines with false price tags, claimed to have enjoyed the supposedly more expensive wine than the other, although the price of this wine was in reality much lower than it claimed to be. MRI tests were done while the people tested the wines - and even they showed that the brain felt more pleasure with this falsely-priced wine. It makes me think - are we that hung up on money that we have fooled our brains too?

2. Wallace had effective speaking techniques - one of the most notable the inflection of his voice. One might not consider him to be a particularly intriguing speaker, however, inflection heard in his voice seemed to interest the audience even with his apparent calmness. It seemed that he enjoyed reflecting on his experiences, which made the audience enjoy them as well.

3. Wallace's presentation style was extremely visual. He showed photographs of each item he presented with the important information underneath - like the price, instead of reading it aloud. The visual aid to his presentation made sense, as it is easier to understand the idea associated with the product when you are able to see it with your own eyes. In addition, he showed the photograph, and waited a few seconds to have the price appear. This is effective, as it allows the audience to make a guess as to the price of the item - and when the actual price appeared, it made it all the more astonishing after being able to soak in the appearance of the item. One more aspect, also visual, about Wallace's presentation style was the occasional photograph purely in the interest of comedy. When a dog is pictured lounging with and using these extremely expensive items, the point of the presentation is driven even further. It also provides a break from incredible information and keeps the audience entertained and interested. In addition, Wallace described his experience of testing an item out and reflected on it. This gave the audience insight to the reality of the product. However, for other items, Wallace presented the item and the price, and took a moment or two of silence. This enabled the audience to form their own opinion and view of the item.

4. This video matters. Like mentioned in question one, in today's society, there is a pressure to be perfect and to be wealthy. There seems to be an obsession with material things. However, this video exposes the reality in having these sorts of items. What it does is show that the most expensive is not, in fact, what is always the best. This is such an essential aspect to understand - because when people become consumed by what they have rather than who they're with, there is a great probability that their lives will change - and not for the better. This matters to me due to personal experience. There have been issues in my life that have made me understand what I truly believe - that is, that people are most important and that to love, to really love, is one of many things that should be strived for. This video matters to education because, again, people today are influenced by media. I believe that education exists for life - and the ideas presented in this video are something to consider deciding how to live one's life - and in deciding who one is. Finally, going off of that last point, this video is important to the world for similar reasons - people fill the world. People are the world. It is vital that we have understanding of reasons why we are here and what we can do.

Ted Talk Response #1 Sir Ken Robinson

1.    1.  What I first took away from this video is how I felt like I knew where Sir Ken Robinson was coming from. Many of my thoughts recently have been similar to his that he expressed. I also took away this somewhat new perspective of children – the way in which he described them: hopeful, already creative… it really made me think. When we think of kids we think of Crayola markers and scribbles… but he mentioned this idea of not being afraid of being wrong. This made me think of what is wrong and what is right, and it made me consider what we are taught today.

2.     2. Sir Ken Robinson has many effective speaking techniques. Obviously, he is quite funny and likes to interact with the audience and make them laugh. In addition, he laughs at himself as well, making his level of relaxation and ease increase, which in turn makes the audience feel more comfortable and more involved... like they want to be talked with. I also noticed how when he described a concept, he used the pronoun “we,” which tells the audience that he is one of them and that he feels a connection to what he speaks about.

3.     3. Sir Ken Robinson’s presentation style is completely relaxed. He does not move around, but this is made up for because he brings in personal experiences and funny examples to keep the audience interested at all times. The presentation appears to be rehearsed and practiced – but only in the sense of the information presented. It is possible to note, however, that every aspect of the presentation was probably rehearsed, not just the informational piece. The key is that Sir Ken brings in funny stories used as examples in such a way that it seems he had just remembered them… as if they weren’t a part of the original scripted presentation. This works wonders on the audience because they feel connected with the speaker due to his relaxation and his personal connections. Examples drawn from reality make it easier to get a point across. In addition, Sir Ken expresses concepts without completely telling the audience what to think. There is a moment used to draw in the audience, to make them understand, and most importantly… room to let them think about the concept.

4.     4. What matters from this video is the concepts presented. Like mentioned above, each concept did not appear to be telling the audience what exactly to think – but each concept appeared to express one different view of reality. Each aspect of the presentation had importance in itself. This video connects to me personally in the ways in which I felt I had had similar thoughts. Often I think of college entrance and what it means to be intelligent. In the sense of education and the world, this video matters because of people. People are all different. It is important to consider exactly what is being taught – and what exactly is considered right or successful - in order to realize that what it appears to be may not be what it actually is.