TEACHER --- MADE VERSUS STANDARDIZED TESTS

Teacher-made versus standardized tests

A distinction between teacher-made tests and standardized tests is often made in relation to tests used to assess academic achievement. Ordinarily, teachers do not attempt to construct tests of general or special aptitude or of personality traits. Teacher-made tests tend instead to be geared to narrow segments of curricular content (e.g., a sixth-grade geography test). Standardized tests with carefully defined procedures for administration and scoring to ensure uniformity can achieve broader goals. General principles of test construction and such considerations as reliability and validity apply to both types of test.

WRITING A RESEARCH REPORT

How to Write a Research Report

Parts of a report

An objective of organizing a research paper is to allow people to read your work selectively. When I research a topic, I may be interested in just the methods, a specific result, the interpretation, or perhaps I just want to see a summary of the paper to determine if it is relevant to my study.
For most studies, a proper research report includes the following sections, submitted in the order listed, each section to start on a new page. Some journals request a summary to be placed at the end of the discussion. Some techniques articles include an appendix with equations, formulas, calculations, etc. Some journals deviate from the format, such as by combining results and discussion, or combining everything but the title, abstract, and literature as is done in the journal Science. Your reports will adhere to the standard format.

• Title page
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Literature Cited
• Examples

For detailed guidelines with examples, consult a text that is dedicated to scientific communication, such as McMillan, VE. "Writing Papers in the Biological Sciences (2nd edition)." Boston: Bedford Books, 1994.
Common errors in student research reports have been collected and summarized, to help you avoid a number of pitfalls. You may also want to keep in mind how lab reports are usually graded as you prepare your work.

Style

In all sections of your paper, use paragraphs to separate each important point (except for the abstract), and present your points in logical order. Use present tense to report background that is already established. For example, 'the grass is green.' Always use past tense to describe results of a specific experiment, especially your own. For example, 'When weed killer was applied, the grass was brown.' Remember - present tense for background, and past tense for results.

Title Page

Select an informative title, such as "Role of temperature in determination of the rate of development of Xenopus larvae." A title such as "Biology lab #1" is not informative. Include the name(s) and address(es) of all authors, and date submitted.

Abstract

Summarize the study, focusing on the results and major conclusions, including relevant quantitative data. It must be a single paragraph, and concise. It should stand on its own, therefore do not refer to any other part of the report, such as a figure or table. Avoid long sections of introductory or explanatory material. As a summary of work done, it is written in past tense.

Introduction

Introduce the rationale behind the study, including

• The overall question and its relevance to science
• Suitability of the experimental model to the overall question
• Experimental design and specific hypothesis or objective
• Significance of the anticipated results to the overall question

Include appropriate background information (but please do not write everything you know about the subject).

Methods and Materials

The purpose of this section is to document all of your procedures so that another scientist could reproduce all or part of your work. It is not designed to be a set of instructions. As awkward as it may seem, it is standard practice to report methods and materials in past tense, third person passive. Your laboratory notebook should contain all of the details of everything you do in lab, plus any additional information needed in order to complete this section.
While it is tempting to report methods in chronological order in a narrative form, it is usually more effective to present them under headings devoted to specific procedures or groups of procedures. Some examples of separate headings are "sources of materials," "assay procedures,"cell fractionation protocol," and "statistical methods." Try to be succinct without sacrificing essential information. Omit any background information or comments. If you must explain why a particular procedure was chosen, do so in the discussion.
Omit information that is irrelevant to a third party. For example, no third party cares what color ice bucket you used, or which individual logged in the data. You need not report sources of basic chemicals that would be found in any supply cabinet, such as sodium chloride or potassium phosphate. Report how procedures were done, not how they were specifically performed on a particular day. For example, report "samples were diluted to a final concentration of 2 mg/ml protein;" don't report that '135 microliters of sample one was diluted with 330 microliters of buffer to make the proteins concentration 2 mg/ml."

Results

Raw data are never included in a research paper. Analyze your data, then present the analyzed (converted) data in the form of a figure (graph), table, or in narrative form. Present the same data only once, in the most effective manner. By presenting converted data, you make your point succinctly and clearly.
Figures are preferable to tables, and tables are preferable to straight text. However, many times a figure is inappropriate, or the data come across more clearly if described in narrative form.
To give your results continuity, describe the relationship of each section of converted data to the overall study. For example, rather than just putting a table in the paper and going on to the discussion, write, 'In order to test the null hypothesis that dust particles are responsible for the blue color of the sky, we observed the results of filtering air through materials of decreasing pore size. Table 1 lists the spectrum of transmitted light at right angles to the light path through air filtered through different pore sizes.' Then present your table, complete with title and headings.
All converted data go into the body of the report, after the methods and before the discussion. Do not stick graphs or other data onto the back of the report just because you printed or prepared them separately.
Do not draw conclusions in the results section. Reserve data interpretation for the discussion.

Discussion

Interpret your data in the discussion. Decide if each hypothesis is supported, rejected, or if you cannot make a decision with confidence. Do not simply dismiss a study or part of a study as "inconclusive." Make what conclusions you can, then suggest how the experiment must be modified in order to properly test the hypothesis(es).
Explain all of your observations as much as possible, focusing on mechanisms. When you refer to information, distinguish data generated by your own studies from published information or from information obtained from other students. Refer to work done by specific individuals (including yourself) in past tense. Refer to generally accepted facts and principles in present tense. For example, "Doofus, in a 1989 survey, found that anemia in basset hounds was correlated with advanced age. Anemia is a condition in which there is insufficient hemoglobin in the blood."
Decide if the experimental design adequately addressed the hypothesis, and whether or not it was properly controlled. One experiment will not answer an overall question, so keeping the big picture in mind, where do you go next? The best studies open up new avenues of research. What questions remain? Did the study lead you to any new questions? Try to think up a new hypothesis and briefly suggest new experiments to further address the main question. Be creative, and don't be afraid to speculate.

Literature Cited

List all literature cited in your report, in alphabetical order, by first author. In a proper research paper, only primary literature is used (original research articles authored by the original investigators). Some of your reports may not require references, and if that is the case simply state "no references were consulted."

Example (title, abstract, introduction)

Title: Evaluation of two models for predicting membrane potential, using crayfish extensor muscle

Abstract

Through measurement of steady state transmembrane potentials (Em) using an intracellular microelectrode recording system, we studied the possible direct role of the sodium/potassium pump in maintenance of Em in crayfish extensor muscles. We varied extracellular sodium ([Na+]out) and potassium ion ([K+]out) concentrations in order to test the predictability of the equilibrium potential model (using the Nernst equation for potassium) and the diffusion potential model as described by the Goldman/Hodgkin/Katz equation. Combined Em measurements from four preparations before and after treatment with 6 mM ouabain showed no significant difference (-59.2 +/- 5.8 before treatment, -56.8 +/- 5/3 after treatment, p=0.06). The Nernst equation for potassium failed to predict Em at low [K+]out but was adequate when [K+]out was elevated to five times control values (+100% error at 0.3 x [K+]out, +22% error at 5 x [K+]out). The Goldman equation was off by +20% and +2.5% respectively, for the same conditions. At [Na+]out of 1x, 0.5x, 0.2x, and 0.05x normal the Goldman equation prediction was off -2%, +4%, +11%, and +7%, respectively. Since measured Em was consistently lower than predicted Em part of the error may be due to a slight electrogenic contribution by the pump. Although the diffusion potential model is a better predictor of Em than the equilibrium potential model pump activity is not sufficient to account for all of the deviation of predicted from measured values.

Introduction

A cell's ability to sustain an electrical potential difference across its membrane is essential for signal transduction as well as the maintenance of structures within the lipid bilayer, such as protein complexes. Studies have shown that this potential difference is due to ion gradients across the membrane, created and maintained by an ATP-dependent sodium-potassium pump. The pump is an antiporter that exchanges three sodium ions from the cytosol for two extracellular potassium ions with each ATP hydrolysis, thus maintaining a high intracellular potassium ion concentration and low intracellular sodium ion concentration. The cell membrane is selectively permeable, so that these ion gradients can maintain an asymmetric distribution of charge across the membrane, leading to a potential difference. Prior to the development of modern techniques for measurement of transmembrane potentials and accurate quantitation of ion conductances, a model describing the cell membrane as a potassium electrode appeared suitable for prediction of the steady state transmembrane potential under physiological conditions. This equilibrium potential model, developed by J. Bernstein, used the Nernst equation for potassium to predict the transmembrane potential. Failure of this model to predict the positive overshoot or hyperpolarization phases of action potentials led to refinement of the model, in which the transmembrane potential is viewed as a diffusion potential. In the second model the contribution of an ion depends on membrane permeability to that ion, as well as its concentration on both sides of the membrane.
In testing the predictive value of each model for transmembrane potentials of crayfish extensor muscle, one question concerns the direct "electrogenic" contribution of the pump. To what extent is the pump necessary for moment-to-moment maintenance of the membrane potential? How might the direct contribution of the pump affect predictability of either model? To test the suitability of both models in predicting the transmembrane potential for this type of tissue we evaluated the role of the pump by measurement of transmembrane potentials before and after poisoning the preparations with ouabain (a direct inhibitor of the sodium-potassium pump). To further test the predictability of each model we varied extracellular potassium and sodium ion concentrations, measured the response of the steady state transmembrane potentials, and compared them with values predicted by the Nernst and Goldman equations, respectively. The results should help determine if the diffusion potential model must be modified to a more universal form in order to predict membrane potentials from a wide range of tissues from different species

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

LITERATURE   REVIEW

A literature review is a text of a scholarly paper, which includes the current knowledge including substantive findings, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to a particular topic. Literature reviews use secondary sources, and do not report new or original experimental work.^[1]

Contents

• 1 Types of Literature Reviews
• 2 Distinguishing between Process and Product
• 3 See also
• 4 References
• 5 Further reading

Types of Literature Reviews

Most often associated with academic-oriented literature, such as a thesis, dissertation or peer-reviewed journal article, a literature review usually precedes the methodology and results section. Literature reviews are also common in a research proposal or prospectus (the document that is approved before a student formally begins a dissertation or thesis). Its main goals are to situate the current study within the body of literature and to provide context for the particular reader. Literature reviews are a staple for research in nearly every academic field.^[2]
A systematic review is a literature review focused on a research question, trying to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence and arguments relevant to that question. A meta analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable result.

Distinguishing between Process and Product

Shields and Rangarajan (2013) distinguish between the process of reviewing the literature and a finished work or product known as a literature review.^[3] The process of reviewing the literature is often ongoing and informs many aspects of the empirical research project. All of the latest literature should inform a research project. Scholars need to be scanning the literature long after a formal literature review product appears to be completed.
A careful literature review is usually 15 to 30 pages and could be longer. The process of reviewing the literature requires different kinds of activities and ways of thinking.^[4] Shields and Rangarajan (2013) and Granello (2001) link the activities of doing a literature review with Benjamin Bloom’s revised taxonomy of the cognitive domain (Ways of thinking - Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing, Evaluating and Creating).^[5][6][7]
The first category in Bloom's taxonomy is remembering. For a person doing a literature review this would include tasks such as recognition, retrieval and recollection of the relevant literature. During this stage relevant books, articles, monograms, dissertations, etc. are identified and read. Bloom’s second category understanding occurs as the scholar comprehends the material they have collected and read. This step is critical because no one can write clearly about something they do not understand. Understanding may be challenging because the literature could introduce the scholar to new terminology, conceptual framework and methodology. Comprehension (particularly for new scholars) is often improved by taking careful notes. In Bloom’s third category applying the scholar is able to make connections between the literature and his or her larger research project. This is particularly true if the literature review is to be a chapter in a future empirical study. The literature review begins to inform the research question, and methodological approaches. When scholars analyze (fourth category in Bloom's taxonomy) they are able to separate material into parts and figure out how the parts fit together. Analysis of the literature allows the scholar to develop frameworks for analysis and the ability to see the big picture and know how details from the literature fit within the big picture. Analysis facilitates the development of an outline (list). The books, articles and monographs read will be of different quality and value. When scholars use Bloom’s fifth category evaluating they are able to see the strengths and weaknesses of the theories, arguments, methodology and findings of the literature they have collected and read.^[8] When scholars engage in creating the final category in Bloom's taxonomy, they bring creativity to the process of doing a literature review. In other words, they draw new and original insights from the literature. They may be able to find a fresh and original research question, identify a heretofore, unknown gap in the literature or make surprising connections. By understanding how ways of thinking connect to tasks of a literature review, a scholar is able to be self-reflective and bring metacognition to the process of reviewing the literature.^[9]
Most of these tasks and thinking challenges occur before the writing even begins. The process of reviewing the literature and writing a literature review can be complicated and lengthy. It is helpful to bring a system of organization and planning to the task. When an orderly system can be designed, it is easier to keep track of the articles, books, materials read, notes, outlines and drafts. ^[10]

See also

• Empirical study of literature
• Review journal

References

1. Baglione, L. (2012) Writing a Research Paper in Political Science. Thousand Oaks: CQ Press.
2. Lamb, David. "The Uses of Analysis: Rhetorical Analysis, Article Analysis, and the Literature Review". Academic Writing Tutor. Retrieved 10 September 2013.
3. Shields, Patricia and Rangarjan, Nandhini. 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. pp. 193-229 ISBN 1-58107-247-3
4. Baker, P. 2000. "Writing a Literature Review." The Marketing Review 1(2) 219-47.
5. Shields, Patricia and Rangarjan, Nandhini. 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. pp. 193-229 ISBN 1-58107-247-3
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_taxonomy
7. Granello, D. H. 2001. "Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: Using Bloom's taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve Literature Reviews." Counselor Education & Supervision 40, 292-307.
8. Granello, D. H. 2001. "Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: Using Bloom's taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve Literature Reviews." Counselor Education & Supervision 40, 292-307.
9. Shields, Patricia and Rangarjan, Nandhini. 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. Shields and Rangarajan (2013) devote Chapter 8 to creativity in the research process.
10. Shields, Patricia. 2000. Step by Step: Building a Research Project Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press

Further reading

General

• Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews.
• Creswell, John (2007) "Review of the Literature", Chapter 2 of Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Dellinger, A. (2005). "Validity and the Review of Literature". Research in the Schools; 12(2), pp. 41–54.
• Dellinger, A. B. & Leech, N. L. (2007). "Toward a Unified Validation Framework in Mixed Methods Research". Journal of Mixed Methods Research; Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 309–332.
• Galvan, J. L. (2009). Writing Literature Reviews.
• Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., and Adams, A. (2006) "Writing Narrative Literature Reviews for Peer-Reviewed Journals: Secrets of the Trade". Journal of Chiropractic Medicine; 5(3), pp. 101–114.
• Hart, C. (2008) ‘Literature Reviewing and Argumentation”. In The Postgraduate's Companion, (eds.) Gerard Hall and Jo Longman. UKGrad. United Kingdom. London: Sage ISBN 978-1-4129-3026-0

Various fields

• Christopher, Aidan (2012). Stock/inventory Management System
• Hart, C. (1998) Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. United Kingdom. 230 pp. London: Sage ISBN 0-7619-5974-2 Set book Open University Social Science Masters.
• Hart, C. (2001) Doing a Literature Search: A Guide for the Social Sciences. 194 pp. London: Sage. ISBN 0 761 6809 1.

Categories:

• Academic publishing

DATA COLLECTION

Data collection  is the process of gathering and measuring information on variables of interest, in an established systematic fashion that enables one to answer stated research questions, test hypotheses, and evaluate outcomes. The data collection component of research is common to all fields of study including physical and social sciences, humanities, business, etc. While methods vary by discipline, the emphasis on ensuring accurate and honest collection remains the same. The goal for all data collection is to capture quality evidence that then translates to rich data analysis and allows the building of a convincing and credible answer to questions that have been posed.
Regardless of the field of study or preference for defining data (quantitative, qualitative), accurate data collection is essential to maintaining the integrity of research. Both the selection of appropriate data collection instruments (existing, modified, or newly developed) and clearly delineated instructions for their correct use reduce the likelihood of errors occurring.
A formal data collection process is necessary as it ensures that data gathered are both defined and accurate and that subsequent decisions based on arguments embodied in the findings are valid.^[2] The process provides both a baseline from which to measure and in certain cases a target on what to improve.
Consequences from improperly collected data include:

• Inability to answer research questions accurately.
• Inability to repeat and validate the study.

Distorted findings result in wasted resources and can mislead other researchers to pursue fruitless avenues of investigation. This compromises decisions for public policy, and causes harm to human participants and animal subjects.
While the degree of impact from faulty data collection may vary by discipline and the nature of investigation, there is the potential to cause disproportionate harm when these research results are used to support public policy recommendations.^[3]

See also

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Data collection.

• Scientific data archiving
• Data management
• Experiment
• Observational study
• Sampling (statistics)
• Statistical survey
• Survey data collection

References

1. Lescroël, A. L.; Ballard, G.; Grémillet, D.; Authier, M.; Ainley, D. G. (2014). "Antarctic Climate Change: Extreme Events Disrupt Plastic Phenotypic Response in Adélie Penguins". In Descamps, Sébastien. PLoS ONE 9: e85291. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085291. edit
2. Data Collection and Analysis By Dr. Roger Sapsford, Victor Jupp ISBN 0-7619-5046-X
3. Weimer, J. (ed.) (1995). Research Techniques in Human Engineering. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-097072-7

Statistics ]  Descriptive statistics [hide]  Data collection Study design Effect size Standard error Statistical power Sample size determination Survey methodology Sampling stratified cluster Opinion poll Questionnaire Controlled experiments Design optimal Randomized Random assignment Replication Blocking Factorial experiment Uncontrolled studies Natural experiment Quasi-experiment Observational study [show]  Statistical inference [show]  Correlation Regression analysis [show]  Categorical / Multivariate / Time-series / Survival analysis [show]  Applications Category Portal Outline Index

Statistics portal

Categories:

• Data collection
• Survey methodology
• Design of experiments

Preparing the Research Design

Once the research problem has been identified, the next task for the researcher is preparing the research design. According to Russell Ackoff, “research design is the process of making decisions before a situation arises in which the decision has to be carried out.” It is the conceptual framework within which the research would be carried out. It is a key aspect as it binds the research project together. Its aim is to provide for the collection of relevant information with minimal expenditure of effort, time and money.
But, whether this can be achieved depends upon a large extent on the research purpose, which is classified into four categories: (i) Exploratory; (ii) Description; (iii) Diagnosis; and (iv) Experimentation. For an exploratory research study, a flexible research design is more appropriate as it provides ample scope for researching various aspects of a problem (E.g.: Types of vehicles suitable for the Indian market. This topic provides extensive scope for writing). For a research paper, which requires an accurate description, the research design should be formulated in such a way that, it is unbiased and vouches for the reliability of the collected data and analyzed (E.g.: Percentage of small car segment in Indian market. This topic needs accurate facts and figures).
There are various kinds of research designs, such as, experimental (independent variable is manipulated) and non-experimental (independent variable is not manipulated) hypothesis-testing. Experimental designs can be further grouped into informal and formal. Informal experimental design normally uses a less sophisticated form of analysis. It includes: before and after without control design; after only with control design; before and after with control design. Formal experimental design offers relatively more control and uses precise statistical procedures for analysis. It includes: completely randomized design; randomized block design; Latin square design; and factorial designs.

Important factors to remember while preparing the research design:

• Objectives of the research study;
• Means of obtaining the information;
• Tools for data collection;
• Data analysis (qualitative and quantitative);
• Time available for each stage of the research; and
• Cost involved for the research.

A well-planned research design serves as a blueprint for the researcher even before he actually starts working on his research. This helps him to decide his course of action during various stages of the research, thus saving his time and resources.

STRUCTURE OF THE EARTH---GEOGRAPHY FORM THREE

 THE    STRUCTURE  OF THE  EARTH

Earth cutaway diagram. The proportions are not accurate.

The structure of the Earth is divided into layers. These layers are both physically and chemically different. The Earth has an outer solid crust, a highly viscous mantle, a liquid outer core, and a solid inner core.
The boundaries between these layers were discovered by seismographs detecting the way vibrations bounced off the layers during earthquakes. Between the Earth's crust and the mantle is a boundary called the Moho. It was the first discovery of a major change in the Earth's structure as one goes deeper.

1. The crust is the outermost layer of the Earth. It is made of solid rocks. It is mostly made of the lighter elements, silicon, oxygen, aluminium. Because of this, it is known as sial (silicon = Si; aluminium = Al) or felsic.
2. The mantle is the layer of the Earth right below the crust. It is made mostly of oxygen, silicon and the heavier element magnesium. It is known as siam (Si + am for magnesium) or mafic. The mantle itself is divided into layers.
   1. The uppermost part of the mantle is solid, and forms the base of the crust. It is made of the heavy rock peridotite. The continental and oceanic plates include both the crust proper and this uppermost solid layer of the mantle. Together this mass makes up the lithosphere. The lithosphere plates float on the semi-liquid aesthenosphere below.
   2. Upper aesthenosphere: magma
   3. Lower aesthenosphere
   4. Lower mantle
3. The core is made of solid iron and nickel, and is about 5000–6000^oC.
   1. Outer core is a liquid layer below the mantle,
   2. Inner core, is the very center of the Earth. It is very hot and, due to the high pressure, it is solid.^[1]

A full explanation of these effects is not yet clear. It seems that with the increasing heat and pressure comes changes in the crystallization of minerals, so that the composition might be a kind of changing mixture of liquid and crystals.

The Moho

The Moho, properly called the Mohorovičić discontinuity, is the boundary between the Earth's crust and the mantle. It was discovered by a Croatian seismologist called Andrija Mohorovičić in 1909. He discovered that seismograms of earthquakes showed two kinds of seismic waves. There is a shallow slower wave which arrives first, and a deep faster wave which arrives second. He reasoned that the deeper wave changed speed as it got just below the mantle. The reason it went faster was that the material of the mantle was different from that of the crust.
The discontinuity lies 30–40 km below the surface of continents, and less deep below the ocean floors.^[1]

Drilling holes

Geologists have been trying to get at the Moho for years. During the late 1950s and early 1960s Project Mohole did not get enough support, and was cancelled by the United States Congress in 1967. Efforts were also made by the Soviet Union. They reached a depth of 12,260 metres (40,220 ft) over 15 years, the world's deepest hole, before abandoning the attempt in 1989.^[2]
Reaching the discontinuity is still an important scientific target. A more recent proposal considers a self-descending tungsten capsule. The idea is that the capsule would be filled with radioactive material. This would give off enough heat to melt the surrounding rock, and the capsule would be pulled down by gravity.^[3]
The Japanese project Chikyū Hakken ("Earth discovery") plans to use a drilling shop to drill down through the thinner ocean crust. On 6 September 2012 Scientific deep sea drilling vessel Chikyu set a new world record by drilling down and obtaining rock samples from deeper than 2,111 meters below the seafloor off Shimokita Peninsula of Japan in the northwest Pacific Ocean.^[4]

References

1. Levin H. 2006. The Earth through time. 8th ed, New York: Wiley. Chapter 7, p184. ISBN 0-471-69743-5
2. "How the Soviets drilled the deepest hole in the world". Wired 2008. Retrieved 2008-08-26.
3. Ozhovan M. et al 2005. Probing of the interior layers of the Earth with self-sinking capsules. Atomic Energy. 99, 556–562. doi:10.1007/s10512-005-0246-y.
4. A report on the findings does not appear to be published yet. The following link is to the planning proposal, April 30 2012. [1]

Categories:

• Earth
• Structure of the Earth

WHAT IS CLIMATOLOGY ?

CLIMATOLOGY

Climatology (from Greek κλίμα, klima, "place, zone"; and -λογία, -logia) is the study of climate, scientifically defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of time.^[1] This modern field of study is regarded as a branch of the atmospheric sciences and a subfield of physical geography, which is one of the Earth sciences. Climatology now includes aspects of oceanography and biogeochemistry. Basic knowledge of climate can be used within shorter term weather forecasting using analog techniques such as the El Niño – Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), the Northern Annualar Mode (NAM) which is also known as the Arctic oscillation (AO), the Northern Pacific (NP) Index, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), and the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation (IPO). Climate models are used for a variety of purposes from study of the dynamics of the weather and climate system to projections of future climate.

WAYS OF BECOMING A PHILOSOPHER

How to Become a Philosopher

Have you ever thought you could be just like Aristotle^[1] - if you just had the right push? Well, here it is. These are instructions on how to become the philosopher you have always wanted to be.

Steps

1. 1
   Understand that there is no exact way to become a philosopher. You must free yourself of all limitations such as prejudice, ignorance, and point of view when examining an issue. The Philosopher is one who dwells in reflection (but not maudlin navel-gazing): s/he takes every experience and seeks to understand, even if they need to be brutally honest with themselves. Philosophers are often people who see the world from a child's eyes. It is important to listen to people, and travel a lot, to get a sense of the world and the people in it. Asking people in your town about what they think of the war in Iraq isn't really going to help, as a lot of these will give stereotypical answers, and will not be well-informed.
2. 2
   Understand that it is not uncommon for philosophers to adopt a certain bias over time or in a specific issue. These are merely frameworks; patterns of thought. Many of the greatest philosophers do just this, the evidence being perhaps most prominent when comparing Eastern Philosophy to Western approaches. In this case, the incorporated bias is acceptable if justifiable. Yet remember to examine the issue without bias as mentioned in the first step, with biases tending to emerge solely in responses, and are subject to critique.
3. 3
   Understand that there is also no exact way in which you can investigate, and this is part of philosophy. Some philosophers, like Descartes, only trusted their mind and logic, and not the senses. Some say that the best way to start off, is to research about philosophy. When you study philosophy in college or university, you study about all the different philosophers and their opinions. Think about it, and agree--or disagree--with what they think. In this step it is important to actually take a stance on the topic at hand in order to find truth and achieve progress. If one were to remain free of point of view indefinitely as stated in step one, nothing would be accomplished.
   4
   Think about the world, what it means to live, to die, to exist, and what the point of it is. Be the source of your own investigation. Since you're always available to yourself, any line of investigation about yourself (and there can be many) allows you to always make some progress. Consider the basis for what you believe. Why do you believe what you believe? Start from scratch and identify your reasoning.
4. 5
   Write down what you think about these subjects, including ideas you think you shouldn't write down (possibly because you think others may think they are stupid). While you may not be arriving at any striking conclusions, you will be exposing your own assumptions to yourself. You will probably marvel at how silly some of your assumptions can be, and in the process you will mature.
5. 6
   The true power of philosophy lies in the continuity of thought that you'll be maintaining in your writing. As you investigate a concern, a single entry may do little on its own, but as you return to that concern throughout the day(s), the different circumstances you encounter in a day will allow you to bring fresh insights to your investigation. It is this cumulative power of thought that will bring you to those 'Eureka!' moments.
6. 7
   Re-write your ideas more formally and let others read your work, so you can get others to hear your ideas. You can ask friends, relatives, teachers, or classmates if they could offer some thoughts on your work, or you can post your writings online (through a website, a blog, or a message board) and look for responses there.
7. 8
   Engage in any debate possible. This will increase your ability to think freely. Keep in mind, however, that you are not engaging in intellectual Olympics. There will always be someone who knows something better than you, and arrogance will stop you dead. You will need a healthy measure of humility. Yet it is also important to bear in mind what is in fact the truth of the situation. It is not uncommon for debates to be decided in favor of the "less truthful" side due to a number of extraneous factors, especially in an informal setting. Weigh the actual evidence, and avoid being swayed solely due to repetition and ignorance.
8. 9
   Read philosophy copiously, learning new questions and problems to think about and past solutions, and their criticisms. Pursuing a bachelor's or master's degree in philosophy is a good way to structure these studies, but many great philosophers were also self-taught. Balance your copious reading with your self-investigative writing: where reading broadens your perspective of the world, your writing will give you depth of understanding.
9. 10
   The technical framework that underscores the effort of the philosopher, is that of model development: Whether we're aware of it or not, each of us has an abductive model of reality, that is constantly modified to fit our observations. We can employ deductive reasoning (given the existence of gravity, the stone is obviously going to fall when I let it go), and inductive reasoning (I've seen that weather pattern many times; I'll bet it'll rain again, though I can't be sure) to create this model of successive approximations. Unlike the majority of people, the philosopher will never permit themselves to become sandbagged by the complexity of nature; even under the most trying of times, they'll be looking to learn something about themselves, and about the world around them. They will do this in their writings. While these writings will be largely self-investigative (they will have earned a PhD in their studies of themselves), they will not hesitate to read from other sources to help fill in blanks. It is in this way that their model of reality will allow them uncommon insights into our world.
10. 11
    Pursue philosophy as a career by acquiring a doctorate in philosophy and getting a professorship at a university. This can be highly competitive, expensive, and challenging, but getting paid to think can be extremely rewarding.

Tips

• Wondering is philosophy, philosophy is wondering. Never stop asking why, even when you are given an answer.
• Look for meaning behind everything around you. WHENEVER you encounter something that your intuition tells you doesn't make sense or seems "fishy" then look into why. Often when we think "I'm not sure that's entirely true" it's our deep philosophical assumptions contradicting each other. Nietzsche said that philosophy is more than reading philosophical works. True philosophy comes from daily thought and analysis of everything around us.
• Don't hesitate to argue positions that are the opposite of what you believe. Being able to see as many sides of an issue as possible is an excellent way to express yourself and opinions. A supreme philosopher can (and probably will) challenge even the most basic beliefs and ideals the human race stands for without fear of criticism. This is exactly what Darwin, Galileo, and Einstein did, and why they are remembered.
• Assumptions are the bane of philosophy and of fresh, intelligent thought. Never stop asking "why?"
• As George Bernard Shaw said: “If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea as well, and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.” Don't be scared of having your ideas stolen by others when you share it with them. Having people hear your ideas will spark criticism and contribution within them, only strengthening your own thoughts and counter-argumentation.
• If you don't get it at first, think about why you can't get philosophy. Keep asking yourself questions and don't listen to your first assumptions.

Warnings

• By philosophizing, your ideas will mature, so much so that you may outgrow friends. You may find that your friends are not interested, or they are unwilling to compromise their ideas. This is normal, though it can be isolating. Remember to stay humble. Philosophy can tear friendships apart if you do not practice caution. It is a sad but true fact, that many philosophers feel very lonely, especially in their childhood. "The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable." (James Garfield)
• Don't be afraid to voice a radical opinion. But letting its novelty and originality turn into arrogance will only blind you from seeing the validity of more conservative ideas, thus destroying philosophy, which is centered around questioning and finding the truth, not around satisfying your desires.
• You need to be able to accept criticism, and work with it. As a philosopher, you will have a lot of criticism. This is because you are one of those radical thinkers who make the ideas rather than just agree with them. Accept such criticism with the appropriate degree of certainty. Always remember to analyze the evidence presented in order to find understanding.
• And finally, a positive warning: This very process of self-investigation has enormous psychologically therapeutic benefits. Anyone taking this effort will possess enough self-worth to undermine poor self-esteem, and will have the advantage of quiet resolve instead of fear or grandiose bravado underlying their personality.

MEANING OF CHARISMA

What is Charisma?

It is common for people to struggle with a definition of ‘charisma’ in relation to communication and the social sciences.

Ultimately charisma is the result of excellent communication and interpersonal skills, as these skills can be learned and developed - so developing your charisma is possible.

How to be Charismatic

Becoming charismatic involves paying careful attention to how you interact with other people; the traits that make up charisma are positive and appealing to others.  The charismatic person uses their skills to get people on their side, perhaps from a professional, ideological or social point of view. For these reasons charisma is often linked to leadership skills - being charismatic can be an important trait of a successful leader.

When asked to think about a charismatic person most people think about a public figure, like a politician, celebrity or successful leader.  These people are charismatic and successful, due often to their charisma, but there are also many ‘ordinary’ people who possess a charismatic personality.   The popular child at school, the staff in the restaurant who make the most tips, the popular person in the office who is friends with everybody.

Some people are more charismatic than others - we can recognise charisma but what makes it?   This page explores some of the traits of the charismatic person and how such traits may be developed.

---

Being Charismatic Means:

Being Confident

Charismatic people are confident people – or at least have the ability to appear confident.  Being confident to communicate in a variety of situations, one-to-one, in groups and in front of audiences is a skill that many people struggle with.  A charismatic person can not only appear confident in communication but they can also help others feel confidence too, thus aiding and enhancing the communication process.  Charismatic people are confident in a positive way, without being boastful or egotistical.
See our pages: Building Confidence and Improving Self-Esteem for more information.

Showing Optimism

As with confidence charismatic people are, or have the ability to appear, optimistic.  This means they try to see the best in other people, situations and events - they usually remain cheerful and 'bubbly'.  Charismatic people have the capability to encourage others to see things as they do, thus they can enthuse and enable others to feel more optimistic. 
Positive thinking and optimism can be powerful forces for successful negotiation and problem-solving.

Being an Emotional Player

The ability to appear confident and/or optimistic if you are not requires a certain amount of ‘acting’.  Although charismatic people are very good at showing their true emotions when this works to their best advantage, they are usually also good at masking or acting in a way that makes others believe what they see.   The analogy of a swan is useful in this example, calm and serene on the surface but with a lot of hidden activity out of view to the casual observer.
See our page: Emotional Intelligence.

Being Interesting and Interested

Charismatic people are both interesting – others want to listen to what they have to say, and interested – they want to listen to what others have to say.  Charismatic people are often good storytellers, with an engaging manner when speaking and explaining.  They are able to communicate their message clearly and concisely, being serious and injecting humour where appropriate to keep their audience attentive and focused.  When they are in one-on-one or small group situations, charismatic people will use open, relaxed, body language including lots of eye contact.  They will watch for feedback from their audience and clarify their position accordingly.  When in larger groups or making a presentation to others, body language will be more exaggerated in an attempt to include everybody.
Our pages: Non-Verbal Communication | Personal Presentation | Active Listening and Effective Speaking cover many of these points in more detail.
Charismatic people are also interested in others.  They are likely to ask open questions to help them understand the views, opinions and feelings of others and, because of their ability to make others feel at ease, will often get honest and heartfelt answers.   The charismatic person can be empathetic and considerate towards others, remembering details from previous conversations and therefore gaining respect and trust.
See our pages: Questioning and What is Empathy? for more information.
A sincere smile, maintaining eye contact, being polite and courteous is a very effective way of getting people on your side.  People are much more likely to do things for you if they are treated well and you are nice to them.
See our pages: How to be Polite and Building Rapport for more.

Demonstrating Intelligence

As charismatic people want to be able to communicate effectively with others they are usually good at initiating conversations.  They tend to be intelligent, with an up-to-date knowledge on current affairs and rounded general knowledge.  This makes small talk, the sometimes awkward beginnings of conversations, easier.
Charismatic people often have expert knowledge in some area – they are able to explain complex topics in such a way that their audience understands, adapting their explanations according to the abilities, view point and expertise of those they are addressing.  Expert knowledge also inspires the confidence and belief of others in the abilities of charismatic people.
See our Study Skills section for ideas and advice on how to learn more effectively.

Being Assertive

The power of charisma is the ability to make people want what you want or unite in a common cause.  This ability can be used for both good and bad causes, charismatic leaders may be able to influence and encourage their followers, to motivate people to do what they want.  A charismatic confidence trickster may be able to use their skills to gain the trust and respect of their victims before ultimately extorting money or other valuables.  Charismatic people are assertive but usually in subtle ways, they can persuade through their words, encourage with their optimism and confidence and be assertive by utilising their understanding of emotions, both theirs and those of other people.
(See our pages: Assertiveness and Why People are not Assertive for more on being assertive.

Maintaining Attention to Detail

Charisma is all about attention to detail and the detail of how interpersonal interaction takes place.  It is communicating dynamically, with passion and enthusiasm whilst displaying positive body language.  It involves thinking positively, having optimism and self-confidence, it’s being persuasive and building the respect and trust of others.  We can all learn to be more charismatic by developing our interpersonal skills through understanding and practice.