The University Guide

Nasa Faked the Moon Landings
And Arthur C. Clarke wrote the script, at least in one version of the story. Space skeptics point to holes in the Apollo archive (like missing transcripts and blueprints) or oddities in the mission photos (misplaced crosshairs, funny shadows). A third of respondents to a 1970 poll thought something was fishy about mankind’s giant leap. Today, 94 percent accept the official version… Saps!

Read More http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/magazine/15-11/st_best#ixzz13TX14mkU

The US Government Was Behind 9/11

Or Jews. Or Jews in the US government. The documentary Loose Change claimed to find major flaws in the official story — like the dearth of plane debris at the site of the Pentagon blast and that jet fuel alone could never vaporize a whole 757.

Judge for yourself: After Popular Mechanics debunked the theory, the magazine’s editors faced off with proponents in a debate, available on YouTube.

Princess Diana Was Murdered
Rumors ran wild after Princess Diana’s fatal 1997 car crash, and they haven’t stopped yet. Reigning theories: She faked her death to escape the media’s glare, or the royals snuffed her out (via MI6) to keep her from marrying her Muslim boyfriend. For the latest scenarios, check out www.alfayed.com, the Web site of her boyfriend’s dad, Mohamed Al Fayed.

The Jews Run Hollywood and Wall Street
A forged 19th-century Russian manuscript called “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (virtually required reading in Nazi Germany) purports to lay out a Jewish plot to control media and finance, and thus the world.

Several studies have exposed the text as a hoax, but it’s still available in numerous languages and editions.

The Scientologists Run Hollywood
The long list of celebrities who have had Dianetics on their nightstands fuels rumors that the Church of Scientology pulls the strings in Tinseltown — vetting deals, arranging marriages, and spying on stars. The much older theory is that Jews run Hollywood, and the Scientologists have to settle for running Tom Cruise.

AIDS Is a Man-Made Disease
A number of scientists have argued that HIV was cooked up in a lab, either for bioweapons research or in a genocidal plot to wipe out gays and/or minorities. Who supposedly did the cooking? US Army scientists, Russian scientists, or the CIA. Mainstream researchers point to substantial evidence that HIV jumped species from African monkeys to humans.

The Illuminati Run the World
The ur-conspiracy theory holds that the world’s corporate and political leaders are all members of an ancient cabal: Illuminati, Rosicrucians, Freemasons — take your pick. It doesn’t help that those secret societies really existed (George Washington was a Mason). Newer variations implicate the Trilateral Commission, the New World Order, and Yale’s Skull and Bones society.

Question by aloha: What new theory can you make up regarding theories of personality?
I need to make a new/mini-theory that will be an integration of learnings from theories of personality(Freud, Maslow, Jung, Rogers, Frankl, ETC)
help please. I need a head start.

Best answer:

Answer by Jerome
everyone has one!

it’s new and fresh

TWELVE

Add your own answer in the comments!

It is the responsible of the criminology schools to ensure that everyone who intends to take up the criminology program understand and learn all essential knowledge of criminology. They should be experts in explaining the relationship between the public and crime as well as other elements in the field of study. One obvious example is the fact of three beliefs that define the diverse crime causes constituting the criminology study. Therefore, the schools should draft out lesson plan that includes the exploration of how people view the criminology industry over time.

What most people are not aware of the criminology degree is the new discovery that there is some sort of connection between specific people with their chemical or genetic makeup. There is also speculation that hormones are the essential sources that are contributing a vast difference in the field of criminology. Through the study of criminology, students can proceed into learning how scientific advances and time lead to deeper understanding on how and why crimes are made. In the progress of study, many experts have come to conclude new theories to explain the factors that influence an individuals state of mind, and how they are beguiled into committing a crime.

Besides investigating the criminals and their behavior, criminology schools also teach students to analyze the impact from the society, not neglecting the fact that the bulk of people surrounding those criminals could trigger delinquency, to a great extent. It is believed that most criminals have a certain imperfection in nature where they are pushed to a dead end having no other options but to succumb to committing crimes. However, people claim that there is no nurturing that can possible overcome or ease the outcome.

During the traditional conceptual study of the criminology degree, students were made to believe that crime was made due to a choice, an option between two or more. Back then, the inference of why criminals opt for crimes was because they decided to choose the immediate gratification rewarded by crime instead of considering morality. However, different criminologists may have different opinions on this issue. It solely depends on how students engage themselves into thinking then branch their ideas before preparing to apply what they have to serve the community upon graduation.

Question by Danny: criminology????/?
I was interested in studying criminology at university. Could anyone tell me about what they do?

Best answer:

Answer by curiously curly
i studied at John Jay of Criminal Justice in Manhattan, what i know is Criminology is not much different than criminal justice. If your going for your bachelors, it really makes no difference. youll learn basic law, police and fire studies, basic csi, as well as basic combat training and such. If you do study this major, be sure to pick up whatever classes are offered about terrorism, it will come in handy later on in life as well as raise your chances of getting a better paying job. It did for me.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

When an individual manages to influence the minds of several people to behave in a certain way towards the fulfillment of a specific or a general goal, then that individual is said to have exhibited leadership qualities, and is considered as a leader.

Theories of Leadership

Many writers have put forward their own views and formulated their own theories regarding leaders and leadership. Some of the theories are briefly touched below to give an idea of the literature on the subject of leadership.

Great Man Theory – This theory assumed that leaders are born and not made. Leaders usually were members from the aristocracy since they only got a chance to lead; hence, it was considered that good breeding contributed in making great leaders. The concept of a Great Woman was not explored and androcentric bias was never realized.

In addition, the theory also states that when there is a great need, then a great leader arises, like Buddha, Jesus, Churchill and Eisenhower.

The Trait Theory – This theory assumes that human beings are born with inherited traits and the right combination of traits makes them a leader. Hence, leadership was a matter of traits whether inherited or acquired otherwise. Stogdill (1974) identified certain traits like adaptability, socially aware, achievement oriented, decisive, dominant, energetic, cooperative, assertive, self-confident, persistent, responsible, and capacity to tolerate stress. McCall and Lombardo (1983) identified four basic traits, namely, emotional composure and stability, intellectual breadth, highly developed interpersonal skills, and the capacity to admit errors.

Participative Leadership Theory – This theory assumes that the conclusion of many minds makes a better decision than the judgment of a single mind. Hence, the leader invites participation from the persons responsible for carrying out the work, since it makes them less competitive and more collaborative, thereby increasing their level of commitment. Participants may be subordinates, peers, superiors, or stakeholders. The extent of participation may vary. The leader may outline the objectives or goals and allow the team to decide how it can be achieved or the leader may allow a joint decision to be taken with respect to objectives and its method of achievement or the team may propose but the final decision is always of the leader. Many varieties exist, like consultation, democratic leadership, Management By Objectives (MBO), power-sharing, empowerment, and joint decision-making. The negative side of this theory is that when a leader asks for opinions and does not find them suitable, then it leads to cynicism, feelings of betrayal, reduced motivation and decreased level of commitment.


Lewin’s Theories – Kurt Lewin along with others conducted experiments in 1939 and came up with three styles of participative leaderships, namely autocratic, democratic, and Laissez-faire. In the autocratic style, the leader took the decisions without consulting others. In the democratic style, the leader took the decisions after consulting others or let the majority decide on what is to be done. In the Laissez-faire style, the leader lets others decide on the decisions to be taken. Lewin et al. discovered that the autocratic style led to revolution, the Laissez-faire style lacked enthusiasm and coordination, while the democratic style proved to be the most effective. Since these experiments were done on children, they still required further study and research.

Likert’s Theories – Rensis Likert (1967) theorized four styles, namely, exploitive authoritative, benevolent authoritative, consultative, and participative. In the exploitive authoritative style, the leader uses methods as threats, coercion, and other fear-based methods to enforce conformance. It is always a top-down approach and the views, feelings, of others is given no value. In the benevolent authoritative style, the leader becomes a ‘benevolent dictator’ and uses rewards to motivate performance. The leader listens to ‘rose-tinted’ views from the subordinates as they tell only what the leader likes to hear in the hope of gaining rewards. Trivial delegation of decision is done, however important decisions are always made centrally. In the consultative style, the leader seeks consultations, however, most upward flow of information is still rose-tinted and the decision is almost taken centrally. In the participative style, the leader invites participation across all levels, including the shop floor worker, and attempts to make the employees psychologically closer are made. Dissensions, arguments, feelings of betrayal all take place in this style. The leader becomes a ‘father figure’ and a ‘cult head’, whose saying ultimately becomes the final decision.

The Charismatic Leader Theory – This theory assumes that leaders gather followers simply by their charm, grace, and personality. If a leader is not a natural charismatic leader then that individual takes a lot of trouble in maintaining the image and developing requisite skills. They are usually very persuasive and use their body language very effectively. In a theatrical sense, charisma is played out as exhibited by politicians, religious and cult leaders. Conger & Kanungo (1998) have elucidated five characteristics of charismatic leaders, namely, clear vision and its lucid articulation, sensitivity to the environment, sensitivity to the needs of the members, ability to take personal risks to support their viewpoints, and ability to perform unconventional behavior. Musser (1987) noted that charismatic leaders wanted their followers to commit to absolute devotion to themselves. The charismatic leader may not want to change anything or transform anything unlike the transformational leader. If the charismatic leader is well-intentioned then they can contribute significantly to the growth of the entire group, however, if they are Machiavellian and selfish, then by the creation of cults, they can effectively rape the minds and bodies of their followers. Their own self-belief can lead them into psychotic narcissism and their self-absorption is so high, that their irreplaceability, intentional or otherwise, can guarantee no successors and thus they make a permanent mark in history.

The Transformational Leader Theory – This theory assumes that a leader with vision and passion can achieve great things by inspiring, injecting enthusiasm and energy, and thereby transform the individual or the group towards the attainment of individual or group goals. Transformational leaders have a vision and they sell their vision and themselves in the process of creating trust. They lead by example and are always in the thick of action. In order to motivate their people, they use ceremonies, rituals, and other cultural symbolism. They believe that success comes by deep and sustained commitment and are extremely people-oriented. However, transformational leaders seek to transform, and if the company has no need to transform, then they feel frustrated.

The Quiet Leader Theory – This theory states that actions speak louder than words. The leader leads quietly by his actions and gives credit to others rather than take it all himself. The quiet leader does not always meet with success and is often faced with extroverted individuals whom he simply cannot handle.

The Transactional Leadership Theory – This theory states that people work for reward and punishment. A clear chain of command with loyalty as the primary focus works best in social systems. The subordinate should only do what the leader tells to do without trying to find out the justification for it. The leader creates clear structures and the subordinates are required to follow. For successful completion of the work, they are rewarded whereas for unsuccessful completion, they are punished. The leader uses management by exception, that is, once the operation has defined performance expectations then it does not need much attention. Exceeding expectations gets praise whereas not fulfilling expectations gets corrective actions. The limitation of this approach is that it is assumed that the individual is a ‘rational man’ (a person who is largely motivated by money and hence whose behavior is predictable), which he may not be due to emotional and social factors. In such a situation, other approaches may prove to be more effective.

The Situational Leadership Theory – This theory assumes that the action of a leader depends on a number of situational factors, like motivation and capability of followers, relationship between the leader and the followers, stress, mood, etc. Yukl (1989) has identified six situational factors namely, subordinate effort, subordinate ability and role clarity, organization of the work, cooperation and cohesiveness, resources and support, and external coordination.

Conclusion

Leaders generally do not follow a single approach and they mix and match as per their needs and requirements. In critical situations, they are more dictatorial in nature as they face the prospect of failure. Leaders generally exhibit integrity (alignment of words and actions with their values), dedication (spending whatever time and energy that is required to get the job done, rather than giving it the available time), magnanimity (giving credit where it is due, accepting defeat graciously, and allowing defeated persons to retain their dignity), humility (not diminishing or exalting oneself), openness (ability to understand new thoughts and ideas), and creativity (ability to think differently).

-o-

Few Sources:

(1) Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse, Leadership Dilemmas—Grid Solutions (Houston: Gulf Publishing, 1991); and Blake and Jane S.Mouton,

The Managerial Grid III (Houston: Gulf Publishing, 1985).

(2) Fred E. Fiedler, “Research on Leadership Selection and Training: One View of the Future,” Administrative Science Quarterly (June 1996), pp. 241–250; Fiedler, “Engineer the Job to Fit the Manager,” Harvard Business Review (September-October 1965), p. 117; Fiedler, A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967); and Fiedler and Joseph E. Garcia, New Approaches to Effective Leadership: Cognitive

Resources and Organizational Performance (New York: John Wiley, 1987).

(3) Robert J.House, “A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness,”Administrative Science Quarterly (September 1971), pp. 321–328; and House and Terence R.Mitchell,“Path-Goal Theory of Leadership,” Journal of Contemporary Business (Autumn 1974), pp. 81–97.

(4) Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton, Leadership and Decision Making (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973). Also see Vroom and Arthur G. Jago, The New Leadership: Managing Participation in Organizations (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1988).

(5) Paul Hersey and Kenneth H. Blanchard,“Great Ideas: Revisiting the Life-Cycle Theory of Leadership,” Training & Development (January 1996), pp. 42–47; and Hersey and Blanchard,Management of OrganizationalBehavior (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1993).

(6) The concept of transformational leadership was developed by James MacGregor Burns, Leadership(New York: Harper & Row, 1978). Also see Bernard Bass, Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations (New York: Free Press, 1985); Noel M. Tichy and Mary Anne Devanna, The Transformational Leader (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1986); and Bass, “From Transitional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision,” Organizational Dynamics (Winter 1990), pp. 140–148.

Question by myusername: Theories??
We’re learning about these six theories in my “Individuals and Families in a Diverse Society” course and I don’t understand any of them, or how they relate to family. My textbook and my teacher use a bunch of fancy words and phrases that mean nothing to me – Could anyone explain these theories in a way that makes it understandable? Please help!

As an example, for one of our assignments we have to find a newspaper article and talk about how it relates to one of the theories. I found one about a homeless man who went missing, but his family still cared about him enough to try and find him. What theory would this apply to? I’m having a really hard time with this.

Best answer:

Answer by plumb
Break down and identify the six theories 1st. Use a dictionary.
you need to try to understand those “fancy” words.

Add your own answer in the comments!