Placing the Focus on Individuals Aptitudes, Skills and Competencies, First, Not Educational Institutions Labels and Budgets Leads to Greatness – 10/17/2013

In any Education, the focus should be on the “individual”, not the “curriculum” and, certainly not, the “diploma” from, whatever institution of higher education and/or high school, it is!!!
“Individual Education” is a “life-long pursuit” and not a “short burst” of time and money “diploma” or “certificate” to try to enter an influential “mafia””coterie” of “alumni students” and “alma mater””teachers” !!!!
“Really Successful Individuals” educate themselves and test themselves, continuously, all their lives, at any age, as in “Continuous Education”,(through the Internet,and, English, to read source materials and communicate through a global standard that everyone is supposed to understand, among other means) to reach the level of understanding necessary to satisfy their personal curiosity and satisfy their personal development objectives, including, or not, depending on their individuals’ own choices, the realization of a “masterpiece” magnum opus representing the product(s) and/or service(s) they tried and succeeded in producing……..
This “used to be” the focus of basic to high-end Schools and Universities in the Western Culture since the Greeks, Latins  and the Middle Ages, where, in particular, students “age” and “origins” or “financial status” were “irrelevant”, “diplomas” were nonexistent, but, where, individuals talents and skills were of the utmost importance, crowned by the “individual’s” “masterpiece”…… .
Today, we are very far from focusing on the “individual”, instead focusing on the “high-end university and/or high school brand labeling sticker diploma”…….
Worldwide, the “authenticity” of the “quality” “control” of these “high-end university and/or high school brand labeling diplomas” is protected by a “mafia” “coterie” of “alumni students” and “alma mater””teachers”, who all have a “vested interest” in “protecting” the “value” of their “brand”, at “any cost”……
Worldwide industries, corporations, government institutions, at all levels, being infiltrated by the “mafias””coteries”of “alumnis” and “alma mater””teachers”, are the victims of their “own”hubristic””laziness” by delegating to those “education brand serial manufacturers” the responsibility to ensure they “acquire” what, in fact, should be a “meeting of the minds”, “convincing” the “innovative masters” that produced their “masterpieces”, which organization would make a positive difference with their acquired individual knowledge and capabilities, to entice the individuals to join the institutions that deserve their contributions……
Worldwide institutions, of any kind, are, less and less, able to “qualify”, “evaluate”, on their own, the value of the “individuals” they need to “acquire”.to “think out of the box” and “generate” the “next wave” of “innovations” and “improvements”, in any sector………
They “invest” in “run of the mill” “curricula regurgitators” not “out of the box””innovative””improving””thinkers”…………..
How many “un-recognized potential Nobel Prizes”, in any discipline, lie, out-there, “wasted”, by a very “wasteful” “gang” “coterie” “indoctrination” process.of official governments institutions education diplomas rules and organizational recruiting short-sighted laziness…….
“Greatness”, whatever it is, is often, “aptitude”, “innate””talents” “supported” by “acquired””skills”……….in whatever combination(s) necessary to deliver “competency”………..
“The average net worth of billionaires who dropped out of college, $9.4 billion, is approximately triple that of billionaires with Ph.D.s, $3.2 billion. Even if one removes Bill Gates, who left Harvard University and is now worth $66.0 billion, college dropouts are worth $5.3 billion on average, compared to those who finished only bachelor’s degrees, who are worth $2.9 billion. According to a recent report from Cambridge-based Forrester Research, 20% of America’s millionaires never attended college.”
Nobody used to ask Leonardo da Vinci from which universities and/or school(s) he was from and what was his diploma(s)………..
“Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (; April 15, 1452 – May 2, 1519,) was an Italian Renaissancepolymath: painter, sculptor, architect, musician, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist, and writer. His genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. Leonardo has often been described as the archetype of the Renaissance Man, a man of “unquenchable curiosity” and “feverishly inventive imagination”.He is widely considered to be one of the greatest painters of all time and perhaps the most diversely talented person ever to have lived.According to art historian Helen Gardner, the scope and depth of his interests were without precedent and “his mind and personality seem to us superhuman, the man himself mysterious and remote”. Marco Rosci states that while there is much speculation about Leonardo, his vision of the world is essentially logical rather than mysterious, and that the empirical methods he employed were unusual for his time.“”
An aptitude is a component of a competency to do a certain kind of work at a certain level, which can also be considered “talent”. Aptitudes may be physical or mental. Aptitude is not knowledge, understanding, learned or acquired abilities (skills) or attitude. The innate nature of aptitude is in contrast to achievement, which represents knowledge or ability that is gained.”
“A skill is the learned ability to carry out a task with pre-determined results often within a given amount of time, energy, or both. In other words the abilities that one possesses. Skills can often be divided into domain general and domain-specific skills. For example, in the domain of work, some general skills would include time management, teamwork and leadership, selfmotivation and others, whereas domain-specific skills would be useful only for a certain job. Skill usually requires certain environmental stimuli and situations to assess the level of skill being shown and used.” “People need a broad range of skills in order to contribute to a modern economy. A joint ASTD and U.S. Department of Labor study showed that through technology, the workplace is changing, and identified 16 basic skills that employees must have to be able to change with it.”
“Competence (or competency) is the ability of an individual to do a job properly. A competency is a set of defined behaviors that provide a structured guide enabling the identification, evaluation and development of the behaviors in individual employees. The term “competence” first appeared in an article authored by R.W. White in 1959 as a concept for performance motivation. Later, in 1970, Craig C. Lundberg defined the concept in “Planning the Executive Development Program”. The term gained traction when in 1973, David McClelland, Ph.D. wrote a seminal paper entitled, “Testing for Competence Rather Than for Intelligence”. It has since been popularized by one-time fellow McBer & Company (Currently the “Hay Group”) colleague Richard Boyatzis and many others, such as T.F. Gilbert (1978) who used the concept in relationship to performance improvement. Its use varies widely, which leads to considerable misunderstanding.” “Some scholars see “competence” as a combination of practical and theoretical knowledge, cognitive skills, behavior and values used to improve performance; or as the state or quality of being adequately or well qualified, having the ability to perform a specific role. For instance, life, management competency might include systems thinking and emotional intelligence, and skills in influence and negotiation.”
“Competency is also used as a more general description of the requirements of human beings in organizations and communities.”
“Competency is sometimes thought of as being shown in action in a situation and context that might be different the next time a person has to act. In emergencies, competent people may react to a situation following behaviors they have previously found to succeed. To be competent a person would need to be able to interpret the situation in the context and to have a repertoire of possible actions to take and have trained in the possible actions in the repertoire, if this is relevant. Regardless of training, competency would grow through experience and the extent of an individual to learn and adapt.”
“Competency has different meanings, and continues to remain one of the most diffuse terms in the management development sector, and the organizational and occupational literature.
“Greatness is a concept of a state of superiority affecting a person, object, or place. Greatness can also be referred to individuals who possess a natural ability to be better than all others. The concept carries the implication that the particular person or object, when compared to others of a similar type, has clear advantage. As a descriptive term it is most often applied to a person or their work, and may be qualified or unqualified. An example of an expression of the concept in a qualified sense would be Winston Churchill was one of the greatest wartime leaders”. In the unqualified sense it might be stated “Winston Churchill achieved greatness within his own lifetime”, thus implying that “greatness” is a definite and identifiable quality. Application of the terms “great” and “greatness” is dependent on the perspective and subjective judgements of those who apply them.Whereas in some cases the perceived “greatness” of a person, place or object might be agreed upon by many, this is not necessarily the case, and the perception of “greatness” may be both fiercely contested and highly individual.”
“Historically, in Europe, rulers were sometimes given the attribute “the Great”, as in Alfred the Great and Peter the Great. The Latin equivalent “Magnus” was also used, as in Albertus Magnus and Carolus Magnus. The English language uses the Latin term magnum opus, (literally ” Great work”) to describe certain works of art and literature.”
“Since the publication of Francis Galton’s Hereditary Genius in 1869, and especially with the accelerated development of intelligence tests in the early 1900s, there has been a vast amount of social scientific research published relative to the question of ‘greatness’. Much of this research does not actually use the term ‘great’ in describing itself, preferring terms such as ‘eminence’, ‘genius’, ‘exceptional achievement’, etc. Historically the major intellectual battles over this topic have focused around the questions of ‘nature vs nurture’ or ‘person vs context’.Today the importance of both dimensions is accepted by all, but disagreements over the relative importance of each are still reflected in variations in research emphases.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s