Book Review Contest: The Hobbit (Reviewed by Chew Phye Ken)

From the laptop of Ken: ‘The Hobbit’, first published in 1937, sprung from the imagination of JRR Tolkien and is the prequel to ‘The Lord of the Rings’, its more celebrated cousin. I did consider giving you, dear reader, little excerpts of the story but thought it better that the protagonist himself should say a word or two instead. Allow me to introduce you to Bilbo Baggins Esq.

From the quill of Bilbo: This splendid story opens with the introduction of a most famous, a most agreeable and a most heroic hobbit (me), who lives in a comfortable, rather large hole in the ground. Life was a picture of serenity until the arrival of the Grey Wizard. From then on, my world turned topsy-turvy with a flurry of several other visits from dwarves with incredible names (Balin, Dwalin, Bifur, Bofur, Dori, Nori, Ori, Oin, Gloin and oh the list goes on), my being commissioned to partake in a perilous quest and the beginning of countless brushes with death. Allow me to highlight a few of our more remarkable adventures (to whet your appetite). The first was my encounter with the three trolls. How foolish of me to have attempted to steal from them and how humbling to get caught. Our whole company of dwarves ended up as captives as well (and probably would have been the trolls’ next meal were it not for the wiles and wisdom of Gandalf and the timeliness of the morning sun). Then there was the misadventure with the goblin hoard in the depths of their underground lair, the snaking labyrinth that led me to chance upon Gollum (where my life hung in the balance, literally perched upon riddles) and his ring I found along the way. From then on our company found refuge in the warm halls of the mystical Beorn, plunged into woods infested with gigantic spiders, languished in the halls (and prisons) of the wood elves, squeezed ourselves in barrels that floated down river for days and ultimately escaped death in the cavern of a dragon. Oh, there is so much more to tell, but I will give you the pleasure of reading it for yourself.

From the laptop of Ken: The characters crafted by Tolkien are varied and rich, from the endearing tiny hobbits with their large, hairy feet to colossal creatures that inspire nightmares. Leading the cast is Bilbo himself, who is pictured throughout the book as an occasional warrior, constant saviour and ever loyal friend. He starts out as a pushover but by the end is every bit the hero - his transformation gradual but astounding. Guiding him is the venerable and noble Gandalf, a powerful wizard with a conventional long pointed hat, staff and a flowing silvery beard. Although Gandalf is noticeably absent in many crucial parts of the book, his larger than life personality echoes throughout, and you never know when or where he will make his next appearance. The company of dwarves (and their names) provide intermittent comic relief and their valour and love for adventure propels the story to its end. There are villains aplenty, but the two most chilling are undoubtedly the infamous Gollum with his hiss and Smaug the dragon with his red, red scales and wicked fiery breath.

Tolkien’s prose is polished and simple enough for older children to appreciate without it being an affront to an adult’s intelligence. In fact, among the most delightful elements of the book are the rhymes and songs that the characters periodically burst into. This is a stanza of one from the dwarves inviting Bilbo to join them in their quest:

‘Far over the misty mountains cold,
To dungeons deep and caverns old,
We must away ere break of day
To seek the pale enchanted gold.’

And they carry on deliciously …

Tolkien also has a proverbially charming way with dialogue. When Bilbo first meets Gandalf, a straightforward and sensible ‘Good morning’ escapes his lips, to which Gandalf replies ‘What do you mean? Do you wish me a good morning, or mean that it is a good morning whether I want it or not; or that you feel good this morning; or that it is a morning to be good on?’ Who knew that so much could come out of two words that we take for granted every day? Hilarious! Being an Anglophile, I adore that the book has a very English feel to it as well; from afternoon tea and ginger cakes to Cockney accented trolls. Come to think of it, I would not have been surprised if I had discovered that the inhabitants of Middle Earth enjoyed a good game of football. Another plus point for the book is that as simple as the story line is, it is nonetheless attention grabbing. There were some parts that left me holding my breath, even if it was for just a while (Bilbo’s encounters with Gollum and his riddles and the dragon in his lair come to mind) and some parts that left me breathless, panting with the characters as they raced and fought tooth and nail through certain perils. In a nutshell it was a pleasurable read.

A minor disappointment though was the book’s failure to adequately narrate what had promised to be a battle of epic proportions toward the end. It was over as soon as it started and was thereafter explained in a most convenient fashion. I guess you can rarely have it all, but perhaps that was done on purpose, keeping in mind what the author had for a sequel.

Gandalf ends the book by remarking that although Bilbo is ‘a very fine person’, he is ‘only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all’. I am inclined to disagree. Tolkien’s characters (and his story) have left an indelible impression on this little fellow in his wide world.

Web 3.0

Web3.0

View more presentations from Johannes Bhakdi. (tags: web3.0 web2.0)

101 Free Learning Tools

View more presentations from zaid. (tags: thinking tools)

Teachers & Quarterbacks

Malcolm Gladwell (author of bestsellers 'Tipping Point', 'Blink' and 'Outliers') writes about the responses to his latest article in the New York Times:

In some of the responses to the piece, I've seen some resistance to the idea that choosing NFL quarterbacks and choosing public school teachers represent the same category of problem. There are only a small number of NFL quarterbacks, and we are selecting candidates from a tiny pool of highly elite athletes. By contrast, we need a vast number of public school teachers and we're recruiting from an enormous non-elite pool to fill that need. So, the response has gone, it's apples and oranges.

Precisely! But of course non-symetrical comparisons are far more interesting and thought-provoking than symetrical comparisons. If I wrote a piece about how finding good point guards in the NBA was a lot like finding good quarterbacks in the NFL, the comparison would be exact. And as a result, it would be relatively useless. What new light does the addition of a second, identical example shed on the first?

What makes an idea thought-provoking, to my mind, is the extent to which we are forced to make an effort to assimilate apparently contradictory or at least antagonistic notions. Roger Martin, the dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, has a wonderful book out on this very idea ("The Opposable Mind"). He argues that what distinguishes successful business leaders is their ability to reconcile apparently irreconcilable options. So, for example, the genius of Izzy Sharpe, the founder of the Four Seasons chain, is that he was the first to understand that a hotelier doesn't have to choose between the advantages of a large hotel (breadth of services) and the advantages of a small hotel (intimacy). For years everyone assumed those were mutually exclusive categories. Sharpe realized that you can, in fact, do both. Martin's book made me think that there is value in pushing the envelope on comparisons.

All of this is a long way of saying that instead of resisting the implausibility of the pairing of NFL quarterbacks and teachers, it is actually more interesting to embrace it. And what happens when you do that? You discover that the psychological situation facing the gatekeeper in both cases is identical: that confronted with a prediction deficit, the human impulse is to tighten standards, when it fact it should be to loosen standards.

Second point:

One weakness of the piece, I think, is that I didn't spell out another of the parallels between good quarterbacks and good teachers. One of the obvious implications of the notion that the college experience does not predict professional quarterback success is that professional quarterbacking is a skill learned only in the pros. That is, what matters more than anything in predicting professional success is the quality of the learning environment that the quarterback is drafted into, not the quality of the experience he was drafted from. (Think Matt Cassell's rather remarkable performance this year: surely that's a consequence of being drafted into one of the league's best learning cultures).

My brother, an elementary school principal, believes very strongly along these same lines: that effective mentoring of a new teacher can make an enormous difference in that person's ability to become a "star" teacher. But the problem, he argues, is that the process of mentorship is much too haphazard. As he says, "It's like training NFL quarterbacks by randomly sending them out to teams - some CFL teams, some Division III teams, some Division I College teams, some community teams, and a few to NFL teams."

It strikes me that one very logical response to the quarterback problem is not just to lower entry standards, and be willing to make after-the-fact judgments of quality, but also to spend a great deal more time and attention on the issue of talent development. If Matt Cassell can thrive in the NFL, after essentially zero college quarterback experience, what exactly is New England doing right? And what can the rest of the league learn from them? Maybe that should be the subject of a follow-up piece.

The Psychology of Colour

Tom O'Leary writes:

"What's your favorite color? Obviously, if you ask this question to a group of people, you will get a variety (or spectrum!) of answers. Colors affect people in different ways, and much research has been accomplished to ascertain what emotional response different colors provoke. An effective communicator always takes her audience into consideration when preparing a message. Vocabulary, tone, length of material, and style are all adapted to each particular audience.

But how important is color really in terms of communicating a professional message? Isn't content all that matters? According to psychology.about.com, psychologists estimate that the response to color can account for 60% of the acceptance or rejection of a product or service.

Modern communicators who use design elements in their messages must consider what colors are appropriate for their audience. When considering color in the context of your message, you must take into account the cultural, gender, and age difference of your audience." (read on)

Pick-Up Artist's Guide to Effective Online Marketing

A cute article by James Chartrand, worth pondering:

"A beautiful woman sits alone at a bar. She’s had a long day. Clients were difficult, work piled up, and she scrambled frantically to get it all done. Now she’s tired and trying to unwind.

On either side of the woman sits a man. One is wearing a fancy suit, a gold watch, and has a briefcase next to him. The other man wears a baseball cap, a t-shirt, jeans and sneakers.

The man in the fancy suit starts talking to the woman. He tells her about his credentials and diplomas. He mentions his Ivy League education and his top marks. He’s impressive, and he doesn’t mind letting her know.

He talks about last year’s deals, each worth at least a million dollars. He bandies some big names around, and tells the woman how he has personal connections to each one. He mentions his luxurious apartment, his five cars, and his success stories.

Then he hands the woman a sleek business card with bold, gold lettering. He asks for her card in exchange and mentions that if he gets it, he’ll put her on his list of preferred customers (along with other hinted perks).

The woman turns to the other man in the baseball cap. The man strikes up conversation and asks the woman about her day. He listens to her answers. He asks more questions. He lets her lead the conversation, and he expresses empathy, nodding and telling her he understands how she feels.

The conversation revolves around the woman and the problems she faced. The man never talks about himself at all. He offers the woman some suggestions that might help tomorrow be a better day.

Who do you think got the woman’s number?"

Speed Reading Successfully : A Starting Point

Speed reading isn’t just a matter of cranking up the speed at which your eyes cross a page, though: there are multiple methods for increasing your reading speed. It’s also worth considering that different approaches to reading have both benefits and drawbacks. In general, the methods that allow a person to read faster don’t always provide for the same level of comprehension that slower reading allows.

No matter what approach a particular speed reading system takes, most start with eliminating bad reading practices and then accelerating reading speed through a series of exercises. Bad reading habits can include:

• Sounding out word out loud as one reads — or subvocalizing
• Re-scanning over passages already read
• Moving one’s eyes across the page as one reads
• Using one reading speed for all reading material

Subvocalization is often considered the biggest barrier to speed reading. Because of the way that reading is taught in most schools — students learn to sound out letters rather than recognize whole words — most readers automatically sound out words, especially those that aren’t in their normal reading vocabulary. Subvocalization, no matter its value for initially learning to read, slows down most readers. That’s because saying a word, whether aloud or subvocally, takes more time than recognizing a word.

Learn/Read more!

There are also recommended speed-reading software:

• SpeedRead.org
• RocketReader
• The Literacy Company
• eyeQ

Email Campaign Case Studies

From Seth Godin, the master of Web 2.0 marketing:

"In one week, I heard from two companies in the same industry. The comparison is instructive, I think.

Every month, I get a great email from Paul McGowan, founder of PS Audio. His newsletter is anticipated, personal and relevant. I signed up for it and I look forward to it.

Paul mentions his products, their reviews and their new technology. He also tells stories and acts like a real person. Because I signed up for the newsletter, I open it. Because he never abuses my trust, I trust him. If I hit reply, he writes back.

When it's time to buy the sort of thing he sells, I won't look around much, because I'm already sold.

I also got two identical emails (with different subject lines) from a speaker company called Thiel Audio. I never signed up to hear from this company, and judging from the email addresses they used, they harvested my address either from an attendee list at a conference at which I spoke or from an old business card.

The problem with believing that just because you have access to an address you have the right to mail is that there is no friction with email. It's free. You can email a million people in a heartbeat, costing the recipients time (and thus money) and you not much of either. The recipient knows this, and feels exploited or cheated. It's not fair, and so the lack of friction backfires. The very ease of interruption makes the interruption more annoying.

I get a lot of spam from non-reputable companies, but it was surprising to get this html ad via email from a company that used to have a good reputation.

My email box is where I live all day. They showed up, uninvited, and worked to sell me something even though they had no connection with me as a consumer or a blogger. That's not brand building, it's the opposite. Even worse, it's undependable.

With PS Audio, Paul realizes that over time, the more months I get the newsletter, the greater the chance I'm going to trust and like and buy from him. For Thiel, the opposite is true. The more they send, the more people will get in the habit of deleting or unsubscribing. It's not an asset, it's a risk. It doesn't scale, it shrinks.

No doubt, there are old-school marketers who will talk about their right to email or interrupt because it's not against the law, or perhaps it generates short-term sales. The thing is, consumers now have rights too. The right to ignore, to distrust and to choose someone else when it comes time to spend money.

There are a hundred ways to skulk around, to collect email addresses, to write clever privacy policies or to argue about whether opt-out ("you can always unsubscribe!") is a valid way to build a brand. None of those schemes work. What works is exactly one way: making promises and then keeping them. Every person who unsubscribes or deletes or just stops reading your mail is a person lost, a negative word-of-mouth opportunity waiting to happen.

Run an ad in traditional media or online and promise me a great newsletter, or a prize or news or even a discount if I sign up. That's clear and honest and it works.

A spam campaign feels like a smart idea, but over time, the more you use it, the less your brand is worth. A permission campaign, on the other hand, only grows in value, until it gets big enough that you can build an entire business around it.

Earning permission is a long-term, profitable, scalable strategy that pays for itself. Think about how much better off a brand would be if it took the time to make promises, keep them and be transparent about its communications."

10 Reasons Why Eating Raw is Healthier

Some of us may not agree with Jonathan Mead, but here're his 10 reasons:

Live foods. It’s common sense right? A cooked seed won’t grow, but a raw seed will. Heating food over 118 degrees Fahrenheit destroys much of the nutrients in your food. Cooking food also diminishes the natural life energy. I’d rather put living food in my body.

Enzymes. Cooking food destroys much of the natural enzymes (your body can also create enzymes, but can only do so much) in your food that are needed to break down nutrients. Eating raw eliminates this problem.

Insane energy. You won’t know this unless you try it for yourself, but eating raw gives you an amazing boost in energy. I used to get tired around 2 or 3pm during the day. Now I simply don’t have that problem. When I do get tired, it doesn’t last nearly as long and an orange or apple will recharge me within a few minutes.

Better sleep and less sleep needed. I’ve slept better than ever while eating raw. But most importantly, I don’t wake up feeling tired or groggy anymore. On most days, I wake up feeling full of energy.

Increased mental clarity. Eating raw has helped me focus on the things that are important and made me more emotionally in tune with others. I feel like a wall of fog has been removed in my mind. It’s easier to think clearly and focus for long periods of time.

Eat as much as you want. This isn’t really a health benefit, but it is pretty awesome. I never get that uncomfortable full feeling eating raw. You know where you have to unbutton the top button on your pants and take a nap? I don’t get that. I can eat as much as I want, and while I will feel full, I don’t feel weighed down or tired.

Less cleanup. Simply put, there aren’t many dishes to wash when you eat fruit and vegetables. Although if you do compost (like I do), you’ll probably have to do it more often.

No packaging. Eating raw means less packaging all around (well, I guess you could argue that banana and orange peels are “packaging”). This means less trash in a landfill and more room in your cupboards. Win/win for everyone.

More regularity. You should naturally have around two to three bowel movements a day. If you’re going less than that, it probably means your intestines are unhealthily clogged. A raw diet gives you more than enough fiber to keep you regular.

Connection with the earth. Eating food that’s been freshly picked just feels different. You feel more connected to the earth and more grounded. Eating lots of processed foods — frozen or from a box — makes creates more of a gap and leaves you feeling disconnected from the earth that sustains you.

CPD for Teachers

Here's an abstract of an article by our Assistant Principal, Dr. Tan Hui Leng, entitled Continual Professional Development: A Smart Strategy for Excellence in the Classroom.

"This paper discusses the need for continual professional development of teachers or in-service teacher education with a research focus on how this is best implemented to effect learning outcomes in the classroom.

"An in-service teacher education programme, the Cambridge International Diploma for Teachers and Trainers (CIDTT) is analyzed and the learning outcomes of eight teachers who followed the course and the impact in their classrooms are described. The findings indicate that in-service teacher education should be context, rather than content driven, reflective in teaching and learning processes and directed towards best practices in the classroom.

"These findings point to a need for teachers to be fully engaged experientially and self-directed to benefit in the longer term from in-service teacher education." (read more)