Recently in Study Habits Category

If you're like me, you probably get on your laptop, check you're email, then head straight to Facebook. Then throughout the day you may check it once or twice more just to see what people are saying in their status' or if you have any new messages or comments. Like me, you are not alone because according to this article 65% of Facebook users do the very same thing. Well, researchers are now saying that this could be lowering your grades more than you think. It has been found that those who utilize Facebook are underachieving by a whole letter grade compared to those who do not have a Facebook! GPA's of Facebook users were also significantly lower than those who do not use the social networking site. One researcher's explanation is that people are getting of Facebook as opposed to studying. The article cites one student's experience of trying to write a 2,000 word paper with the distraction of Facebook. Her decision as a result of that distraction was to deactivate her Facebook account. This sounded extreme to me, but I remembered a friend of mine who did the exact same thing at the beginning of the school year! Most of Facebook users (79%), however, don't believe the time spent on Facebook has any impact on school work and grades.

I would have to say I'm partially a part of that 79% because when I read this article I was shocked! I know that Facebook is a distraction and I find myself constantly logging onto the site (even when I have to blog or do other homework online) but I would have never contributed my getting a B instead of an A to a social networking site.

Reeve (2009) discusses Relatedness being a psychological need to have social interaction that is warm, close and affectionate (p. 161). With technology advancing sites like Facebook seem to make our friendships less affectionate, but I think our rejection of homework for Facebook is to fulfill our need of Relatedness to a degree.

What kind of impact do you see Facebook having on the quality of your relationships as well as your studies?


I understand that we are an evolving society that revolves on technology tremendously, but what is our motivation for logging onto Facebook several times throughout the day when we are facing deadlines as college students? Have any of you deactivated your Facebook due to the distraction or know someone who has? Does anyone is this class NOT have a Facebook account?
Article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article6078321.ece

The common stereotype of fraternities and sororities is that they are organizations based purely one common goal, drinking as much as you can. Over years and years of this stereotype being glorified by movies like "Legally Blonde" it has become harder and harder to squash this image. A link on the Greek Life homepage of the Ohio Northern University website has finally started clearing the air and labeling the benefits of Greek life. 

Music and the brain

I encourage you to read the entire article because some of the examples and explanations they gave were so amazing and powerful that a summary of it would not do it justice. 

The next time you are going over your notes, or studying for that test put on some baroque style music because it will activate both sides of your brain to maximize your learning!  But the key to the song selection is that it much be at or around 60 beats per minute.  The little article seems to have a sort of disclaimer in saying that just because you listen to music while you are studying does guarantee that you will remember it better, it simply stimulates the other side of your brain so that your attention and retention is better and more active. 

The article also states that baroque and classical era music is best to listen to because their beats and rhythm is based on math; it is ordered.  So if you are looking for some "classical" background music, check out those time periods. 

Fun fact for rock lovers. In the 70's teenagers would bring raw eggs to concerts and by the end of the show they would have been turned to hard boiled eggs.  Researchers say this is due to the high, shrill frequencies and kind of "mix things up". 

(I shouldn't admit this) but in the little time between classes I find myself always frantically trying to finish a homework assignment for the next class.  I put stuff off until the last minute because I "thrive" under the pressure. I have done that with this weeks blog posts/comments and it gave me inspiration (for my post).

Procrastination - News Article

The link above is a news story that popped up after my google search of why I procrastinate. 
It turns out I am just not a perfectionist and I don't have a lot of faith in completing tasks I need to complete.  This is true [for me]...I will be honest that this internet blogging thing is so new to me and I always feel like I'm doing them wrong. So I put them off until Thursday when they are due...and I rush to get them done in a short amount of time.

Some facts that the news took out of the article state that perfectionists don't procrastinate, they just worry more about their final product. Are there any perfectionists out there? If so, is this true?  Also, how do you do it?
Some questions:
To fellow procrastinators, do you think this article is true for you or is it bologna?
Do you think that procrastinators can not procrastinate if they work at it, or will they always delay getting work done?  

I read some of the comments below the article and it seems that most people don't doubt their confidence level and self efficacy as being the problem.  They just do so much better when under stress.

Here is a link to the actual sited article in the news story:
The Nature of Procrastination - Steel

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100119133519.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+(ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News)

I was rather intrigued by the research presented in this article. The main finding is alluded to in the title of the article - recent research suggests that those less motivated to achieve will excel on tasks seen as fun and those more motivated to achieve will not perform as well on tasks that are intended to be for fun. Obviously, this suggests that different students may need different types of motivation to excel. The students that are competitive and serious tend to be significantly less motivated when they think the task is just being performed for fun. Many other students do not take academics so seriously and work better when the task is fun.

Although these two groups are not all-inclusive (plenty of people lie somewhere in the middle of the extremes), I believe these differences do exist in the real world. As some individuals strive for excellence, they can become rather obsessed with perfection and get in the habit of avoiding anything fun-related to maximize their reputation of achievement. Given the incredible amount of time that many of these perfectionists put into their work, it is very hard for others to remain competitive without also putting a tremendous amount of effort into their academics. Because of this, I think many people stick to a more balanced (and perhaps more natural) life, in which they strive for excellence rather than perfection and are okay with not being labeled "the best."

Although I think many people are able to eventually find a balance between work and fun, there will always be those who are unable to achieve such a balance. I have not read much of the literature pertaining to this subject, but I wonder what the common causes of "overacheiving" are. It seems likely to me that some of these overly competitive individuals may be trying to compensate for low feelings of self-worth and others may be motivated by a need to feel superior. Whatever the reasons may be, I think most people realize is better for one's physical and mental health to not be overly competitive, but as people get older I think it becomes increasingly difficult for such people to change because the tendency to be that way has become a fundamental component of their personality. I think this research supports the idea that we can get too carried away and we can be overly motivated. Moderation is key in a great many areas of life.

 

Another questions that arises here is, "Does this research support the idea that people motivated by different approaches should be taught in separate groups (each given the learning style that works best for them)?" If we put more and more highly competitive people together into a single class though, would we also be creating the potential for even higher, even more unhealthy work ethics to arise? I suppose the questions I am posing here rest on the assumption that it can be unhealthy to be overly competitive, but I think this assumption is justified considering that those highly motivated become less able to do tasks that are supposed to be fun.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95949912

 

I found this NPR article on motivating school children to be rather interesting and perhaps somewhat controversial. It talks about paying children according to their attendance, quality of work, and behavior in class. My initial reaction to this story is that this type of program is a great experiment. We already spend tremendous amounts of money on education, but continue to get very poor results in many schools. I think money has sometimes been mindlessly thrown here and there, and we don't see any good come from that. It has sometimes been said that raising the teacher pay will bring in higher quality people or that bringing in various new classroom materials will help students learn, but the problem seems to be deeper than that.

As was mentioned earlier on our blog, one major problem is "stupid homework." By no means am I referring to all, or even most, homework, but in my educational experience I have had plenty of assignments that have just been downright meaningless. You waste a great amount of time, learn nothing, and feel like you've lost a few brain cells in the process. Another part of the problem is that the belief that homework/studying is unpleasant and to be avoided has been instilled in many of us from a very early age. There seems to be a negative connotation with learning, and I think we should work harder to change that, perhaps by doing more to support "science is fun" programs and others like it. If students perceive educational activities as fun, they will find greater energy to put into their learning.

I also think schools can put too much emphasis on grades, which can subsequently cause some children to focus only on letter grades and many others to become apathetic about the education system. Although I have generally got rather good grades throughout my academic career, and a certain amount of assessment is surely needed, putting so much of the emphasis on a few short (and sometimes poorly written) tests does not seem to be the best approach. Sometimes such tests tell you very little about the students except perhaps their abilities to discern/anticipate what information will be asked on the test and cram accordingly. I think many students feel this way, and they feel discouraged when think that they will not be fairly evaluated.

This may be more a problem in the high school and college environments, but I think another very serious problem with our education is an overwhelming lack of clarity in certain classroom environments. Sometimes students are required to read very old texts that are written in an English language that is very different from our own. It is unreasonable for students to be required to read these texts without any guidance from the instructor - the professor should be there for a reason. In college, I know of at least one professor who gets away with murder by having "discussion-based" classes in which the student is given no other instruction than to "read the textbook" - such professors contribute nothing yet get paid in full. When teachers do not present material in a clear, thought out, and interesting manner, the student can become very discouraged and the learning process is heavily impeded. It is a far from ideal outcome to cause some students to have anxiety attacks and others to give up entirely. More needs to be done to address this problem.

The controversy that arises from this Pay-To-Behave experiment also merits attention. A question that inevitably arises is, "Even if these financial incentives greatly increase academic performance, is teaching children to learn solely for money to be desired?" Some would probably argue that it is no different than receiving an allowance for doing chores or a paycheck for a job, but I am still not entirely sure how I would feel if I were one of the parents. I am not sure I would be comfortable sending a child through this program if I thought it would cause them to place money above everything else.