Saturday, May 15, 2010
techniques for improving communication in groups
In the Small Group Communication book, there was a section titled “Techniques for improving Communication in Groups.” I think this section of the book is really important because we have all been in a situation and will be in more of these circumstances where we will need to work with people and improve the communication between us and our peers. One of the ways to help improve the communication is for everyone to have individual roles. For example, when you are at a study group, and everyone has their own roles (Bob does chapter 11, Jane does chapter 12, Fred does chapter 13, etc.), it makes it easier when everyone does their own part. It’s frustrating when someone is assigned a particular task and does not end up fulfilling it. Another thing the book mentioned was deliberation and participation. In order for a group to work best is for everyone to participate in the discussion or whatever is going on. Don’t just let other people think for you. Everyone needs to think on their own and actively share their thoughts and opinions so that everyone can work through things together and have a more improved communication in their group.
what i have learned..
Although this was an online class, and I did not expect to learn much, I actually did! I learned a whole lot more than I would have ever imagined just through reading about other people’s insights on their blogs, as well as writing my own blogs every week. I can’t list everything that I have learned because there are just so many concepts, but I will focus on just the group facilitation final project. That project really enhanced my learning and grasping onto the concepts that I have learned throughout this semester. It was fun to know what my friends thought of each individual candidate, what their reasoning behind each claim was, and how so many of their critical thinking analysis remind me of the concepts I have learned in this class. Some of the concepts they used included arguments, contradictory of a claim, false analogy, unsupported generalizations, effective leadership, etc. I realized how extremely important it is to have a good leader within a group. Otherwise it is hard to get anything done. I really liked how I saw so many of these concepts while my friends were discussing, and it was interesting to know that they don’t even realize all the things they are using during their discussion. This final project has really helped me be able to recognize the concepts not only in the book, but also in our daily conversations.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
generalizing and sample size
Chapter 14 in the Epstein book was really interesting—talking about many generalizations, specifically stereotypes, that occur on a daily basis. While reading through this chapter, I was reminded of many things I have heard other people around me say. That means people generalize frequently, and are not aware of it. One of the main rules for distinguishing a generalization is the sample size. Often times people just assume one group acts or does things a certain way because they have met, heard about, and/or seen a few people within that group, that act that way. For example, “All Asians are bad drivers. I’ve gotten into 3 accidents, and each time, it was because of a collision between an Asian driver and me.” That statement sounds like a generalization, but is it? That is not a very accurate generalization because those are only 3 people you have met that have that problem. One cannot judge a whole group based on only a small portion of that entire group. In order for it to be more accurate, one must have a representative sample.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
the cause precedes the effect
One section of the book that caught my attention while I was reading through chapter 15 was “the cause precedes the effect” concept. Basically, it’s pretty self explanatory, but the cause comes before the effect. For example, if someone gets into a car accident and people come to rescue him and wonder what caused the accident, and realizes he’s holding onto a phone, they can’t be certain that the phone was what has caused the accident. They can accuse the phone and think all they want to think about it, but unless they check to see if the cause precedes the effect, nothing is for sure. They have to check to see if the cause (perhaps the phone) precedes the effect (car accident). If not, then it’s pretty clear that the phone was not the primary cause of the accident. In order to do that, they’d have to check his recent calls and/or text messages to see if the times recorded is during the time period in which his accident occurred.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
mission critical
Similar to the cause and effect website, the mission critical website was also very helpful, if not more helpful. It was a review of all the concepts and key terms that we learned this semester. And I admit, I have forgotten a lot of them already! So reading over the mission critical website was a very refreshing start for prepping for my final. Everything was thoroughly written, but also very concise at the same time. I liked how everything was all together and organized because it made it very clear where everything was located at and where you could go back to review a specific concept you may have been unable to comprehend earlier. It’s a lot more useful to read through this website rather than constantly flipping through the book, trying to find a concept. one of the most useful thing about these websites is the quizzes and how they have an explanation as to why you might’ve gotten something wrong. It really makes this online class a little easier because something is actually being explained to us in detail.
Monday, April 26, 2010
cause and effect
The cause and effect website reading and exercises were definitely helpful when it comes to understanding the concept of cause and effect. I thought I pretty much got the gist of the subject and idea when I was reading this in the book. However, when I got onto the website, I read so many new information about it that the book did not talk about. I guess the book was just letting us know the overview and the very basics of cause and effect. So it was definitely interesting to find out so many other aspects of the concept. I really liked how the website had quiz questions to test us on our knowledge. It was extremely helpful when I would get a question wrong, and the website would let me know why the answer I chose was not the correct one, and then it would allow me to take another guess as to what the answer was. That was my favorite part of the exercise because many times, when I get questions wrong, I don’t know why it’s wrong, because to me, it sounds correct. But when they explained to me why it’s wrong, it was very helpful and gave me the chance to sit there and think about it more, and then to try again. It also helped that there was no time limit, because when there is one, I get nervous and don’t allow myself to read thoroughly and to think critically.
Friday, April 16, 2010
daily examples
it's not difficult to find advertisements that use the different appeals to emotion that there are because salespeople always use these types of techniques to attract customers. however, it is much easier to find just day-to-day examples of these appeals to emotion because they're found everywhere, and i admit, i get caught up in these sometimes too. one time i was babysitting, and the mom of the girl i babysit never gives her daughter too many sweets because of health concerns. the kid knew that and came up with a sneaky "appeal to emotion" that made both the mom and me surprised. she went up to her mom and said, "mom, i like your hair. can i have a cookie?" that is an example of an appeal to apple polishing. the girl was trying to flatter her mother by saying something sweet to compliment her (whether it was true or not) in return for something she wanted--a cookie. it worked! maybe i should try that sometime too! ;)
Thursday, April 15, 2010
apple polishing
apple polishing is a technique salespeople often use to encourage their audience and customers to purchase or support whatever cause they're doing by complimenting them or making them feel like they can make a difference because they're that great. in a way, this advertisement is using apple polishing to make their audience want to help and support their cause. they want people to give to the needy so that other children around the world can have christmas! they wrote, "You can help provide for more than 5,000 homeless and needy children" and it makes us feel good about ourselves, like "If we donate some stuff to these homeless and needy children and help them out, we can show them what christmas is all about." it's also kind of stating that we can make a difference, and that those kids' happinesses are in our hands. we are the ones who can show them what christmas is like and how it is to be happy. because we are so cool, we can make a difference in these children's lives.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
appeal to emotion
In Chapter 10, Epstein shares with us the different appeals to emotion that there are. Our emotions are important especially when it comes to thinking critically and/or making decisions. These requests are often times found on television, advertisements, magazines, and other forms of commercials and business. Salespeople use these in various ways to attract customers and to make them purchase or support whatever it is that they are funding for. There are different types of appeals to emotions that serve different purposes. An appeal to pity is a tactic that salespeople use to make others feel guilty and sorry for the people/animals they want to help. By rejecting them, it makes us feel heartless, which in turn, makes us donate a few dollars to support them. Another approach they use is the appeal to fear, which is an attempt to frighten us. An appeal to spite is a way of intimidating and/or working against certain things in order for us to take revenge. The appeal to emotion that I often come across is the appeal to fear. When I was younger, I would always receive these stupid chain mails in my inbox that freak me out! “Send this within the next 20 minutes to 10 people or someone will stab you tonight when you’re asleep.”
Friday, March 26, 2010
valid vs weak
Every sentence and/or statement we say can be argued against. No matter what the statement is, there is always a way to analyze it. Some arguments sound pretty decent and valid, but in reality, it is considered to be a weak one. They only sound good because it is actually very similar to a valid form of argument.
For example: All fish swim.
Bubbles swims.
So Bubbles is a fish.
Many people would consider that to be a pretty good argument. However, Epstein tells us that it is actually, a weak argument. Sure, Bubbles swims, but so do I! Does that make me a fish? Of course it is true that all fish swim, but the truth is, so do other animals in the sea! Not just animals in the sea though, because there are many other mammals that can swim. Bubbles could be a whale, a dolphin, a dog, even a human! So therefore, that argument is weak. A valid argument, though, would be:
All fish swim.
Bubbles is a fish.
So Bubbles swims.
This here, is a much more accurate statement. If all fish swim, and Bubbles is a fish, then that must mean he swims.
For example: All fish swim.
Bubbles swims.
So Bubbles is a fish.
Many people would consider that to be a pretty good argument. However, Epstein tells us that it is actually, a weak argument. Sure, Bubbles swims, but so do I! Does that make me a fish? Of course it is true that all fish swim, but the truth is, so do other animals in the sea! Not just animals in the sea though, because there are many other mammals that can swim. Bubbles could be a whale, a dolphin, a dog, even a human! So therefore, that argument is weak. A valid argument, though, would be:
All fish swim.
Bubbles is a fish.
So Bubbles swims.
This here, is a much more accurate statement. If all fish swim, and Bubbles is a fish, then that must mean he swims.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
D.A.R.E.
I really enjoyed working on the second course assignment with my group. Having to communicate all the time through computers and internet, with this being an online course, it is sometimes hard to communicate with other peers. Working through this assignment together in person really strengthens not only our bonds with each other, but also our ideas and points of views as well. Throughout this assignment, my group and I focused on the organization, D.A.R.E. As a kid, I have always noticed people walking around with the black and red D.A.R.E. T-shirt on. I never knew what it was for until we researched on it. Turns out, it is a program taught by police officers, encouraging children to stay drug-free, violence-free, and to resist peer pressure .I learned a lot from reading their website, the “kid's only” website, and articles on it. Having to analyze everything helped me to really look in-dept on what this program was all about and how to think critically about different aspects of this organization.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
general claims
When I was reading chapter 8, although it only talks about the words all, some, no, and only, it reminded me of all of the other similar exaggerated words people use. Many times, people use exaggerated words to try and prove a point. For example, they don't just use the words: all, some, no, and only. They also use the similar words: every, always, or never. These words are all very similar because they are all exaggerated claims that try to make a statement sound more legit. However, instead of making it sound like a better claim, sometimes it makes it sound a little fake. I'm sure you guys have all heard people say, "I am never wrong!" Of course, they are just saying that to make a point and a statement saying that they are rarely ever wrong, but "rarely ever" is still not the same thing as "never." Saying "I am never wrong" is just like saying "I am always right." Again, that uses another exaggerated word--always, when they actually mean "almost always."
Saturday, March 6, 2010
judging too soon
Many times when we are talking to people, we hear what they say, but we do not necessarily listen to what they say. There is a difference between hearing and listening. Hearing is when you hear the sounds coming from someone’s mouth, but listening is when you actually break down what they say and understand what is coming out of their mouths. As listeners, we often tend to be biased and only take in what our friends say because we trust their view on certain things. However, as critical thinkers, it is important for us to not only believe what our friends say, but also be critical. Just because we usually trust what they say, does not mean they always know what to do at every situation. At the same time, we can’t just disregard someone’s comment just because they usually do not say adequate things. They might, somehow, just say something very insightful that we should really take into mind. With that said, do not judge an argument based on the person who’s saying it for it may mislead you in the wrong direction.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
sex sells
Calvin Klein, as a fashion designer, designs and sells clothes. However, in his advertisements, such as the one portrayed above, it seems to me that he is actually trying to sell sex, rather than his clothing line. Often times, people who sell clothes, perfume, even deodorant or watches, represent their models as “sex” objects to grab other people’s attentions. The phrase “sex sells” really is true. However, the messages and claims that this advertisement is spreading is that once one purchases an outfit from Calvin Klein, he or she will have the pleasurable sex they have desired and yearned for. This message that is being portrayed can, obviously, be taken many ways. One can either accept, reject, or suspend the judgment and message that the ads are sending out. Just because one obtains some clothing from Calvin Klein, it does not guarantee great sex. You may not even get a man that way! And I know that from personal experience. It is essential for everyone, especially to those whom the advertisements are geared towards, to understand how important it is to trust our own personal experiences because it is the “most reliable source of information” (84) we have. Don’t be fooled by irrational advertisements that try to sell you things by blinding you with unrealistic thoughts.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
repairing arguments
Normally, when in a conversation, it is rare for someone to state every single premise of an argument so that those around him can understand it to be a strong or a valid argument. People often times just assume that everyone else understands what he is speaking about; nothing has to be justified as strong or valid because it’s not essential for us to state all the premises that come along with the argument. However, many statements are in need of repairing. For example: “Tom’s car is running out of gasoline. He needs to get to the gas station as soon as possible before his car dies.” As of now, that statement would not be a very good argument because the conclusion and the premise do not complement each other. If instead, you add another premise that verifies some information we normally assume to be true, it would strengthen the argument. For example, adding “It is crucial for a car to have gasoline in it in order for the car to drive” verifies to the reader that a car needs gasoline in order for it to function properly. With that additional premise given, it reveals the hidden premise to the reader and strengthens the beginning argument.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
sexual harassment
According to O’Hair and Wiemann in chapter 4 of their Essential Guide to Group Communication, sexual harassment is defined as an “unwelcome and unsolicited behavior of a sexual nature.” It consists of any kinds of sexual activity that is unasked for, and includes anything from someone touching you in places you do not wished to be touched, to someone actually raping you. Either way, those kinds of undesirable conduct are occurring daily, whether we notice them or not. Many times, victims of these sexual harassment cases go through life without actually reporting the crimes because they are afraid of dealing with facing their attacker again. Sexually harassment is often times, caused by the misunderstanding of communication between a male and a female because of their different ways of thinking. For instance, if a female innocently smiles or shares eye contact with a male, even just as a friendly gesture, it may often times be interpreted differently to the male mind, and he may assume that she is interested in something else. Those kinds of miscommunication between the two genders are often deceptive and can lead to bad consequences that are frequently regretted. In order for us to avoid these kinds of circumstances, it is crucial for us to understand the behaviors and mindset of the opposite gender.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
violating the principle of rational discussion
On page 202 of Critical Thinking, Epstein explains about the violation of the principle of rational discussion and how the fallacy connects to those who have disagreements in a ridiculous manner. Often times, the people who violate the principles of rational conversations have a motive in intentionally puzzling and/or deceiving those around him. It’s when one declares a statement that is not in any way or form, accurate, to purposely give misleading information to another person. Often times, one is known to "violate the principle of rational discussion" when the premise of his argument is extraneous to the concluding statement and/or his case can easily be interpreted as false and inaccurate. The other day, I heard someone talking on her phone with a friend. She said, “Don’t use Princeton Review. I studied off of it and still got a bad score on my SATs. It's bad and doesn’t help at all.” That’s an example of the violation of the principle of a conversation that is rational. The girl was mocking Princeton Review, saying it’s no good, when in reality, there may be other reasons as to why she did not do so well. Because she ridiculed Princeton Review to persuade her friend and make her argument convincing, she has just dishonored the standard of a rational discussion.
structure of arguments
Exercise #1: The Structure of Arguments.
1). My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard. 2). People do not like living next door to such a mess. 3). He never drives any of them. 4). They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place. 5). It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property values.
Argument? Yes, this is an argument
Conclusion: Although it is number 1 on the list, I believe that it is actually the conclusion to this argument. “My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard” states a case and a declaration, whereas the other statements are simply just reasons as to why they think he should get rid of his cars.
Additional Premises needed? It’s true that many of the premises given above make sense to this argument. However, perhaps there is a reason as to why the neighbor chooses to keep all his cars. Maybe there is a deep and meaningful story behind each one, or possibly, they were given to him as gifts by someone dear to him. Whatever it is, it’s possible to find more details to each premise.
Identify any sub arguments: I believe that numbers 2-5 all support claim #1.
Good Argument? Yes, overall, this argument is pretty good.
This exercise was helpful for me. It allowed me to dig deeper into each sentence and to actually analyze each one, which is something I normally wouldn’t do.
1). My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard. 2). People do not like living next door to such a mess. 3). He never drives any of them. 4). They all look old and beat up and leak oil all over the place. 5). It is bad for the neighborhood, and it will decrease property values.
Argument? Yes, this is an argument
Conclusion: Although it is number 1 on the list, I believe that it is actually the conclusion to this argument. “My neighbor should be forced to get rid of all the cars in his yard” states a case and a declaration, whereas the other statements are simply just reasons as to why they think he should get rid of his cars.
Additional Premises needed? It’s true that many of the premises given above make sense to this argument. However, perhaps there is a reason as to why the neighbor chooses to keep all his cars. Maybe there is a deep and meaningful story behind each one, or possibly, they were given to him as gifts by someone dear to him. Whatever it is, it’s possible to find more details to each premise.
Identify any sub arguments: I believe that numbers 2-5 all support claim #1.
Good Argument? Yes, overall, this argument is pretty good.
This exercise was helpful for me. It allowed me to dig deeper into each sentence and to actually analyze each one, which is something I normally wouldn’t do.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
attaining effective leadership
One concept that struck out to me while reading this week was the concept of having an effective leadership. Similar to the 3 tests an argument must pass in order for it to be considered a good argument, there are also 3 factors that determine whether or not a leader has the capabilities of being a group leader. Effective leadership is when one’s performance is clearly seen as encouraging and inspiring to those around him/her. It must motivate each member of the group to achieve their highest goals and to help them work together as a team. In order for one to achieve effective leadership, he must finish whatever task is thrown at him and complete everything to his best advantage. He must also prove his trustworthiness and consistency with his group members. Once each member has judged his competence and support him, he would become reliable and on his way to becoming an effective leader. The last factor that leads one to becoming an effective leader is to stir enthusiasm for each member of the group to contribute and participate. It is the leader’s job to make sure his group members are actively participating in their work. One must attain all 3 factors in order for him to be an effective leader.
Friday, February 12, 2010
strong vs. valid arguments
In my last blog post, I mentioned that it is crucial to recognize an argument as either strong or valid, which leads me to this next question: What is the difference between a strong argument and a valid one? An argument is considered to be strong when it is probable that the conclusion may be false although the premises of the beginning approach may be true. That means that while the basis of the premise is true, the conclusion may possibly be false. A valid argument, on the other hand, is when both the premises and the conclusion have the same connection—in this case, both being true. When the beginning approach and the ending argument agree and are both true, it means that the argument is therefore considered a valid argument. Take these statements for instance: “Every time she sits in a bus, she gets dizzy. Therefore, she is car sick.” It may be true and likely that she gets lightheaded every time she rides in a bus, but that does not necessarily mean that she is car sick. Maybe she happened to be going to the mountains and going up and down hills every time she was in a bus. It is also possible that the bus has been driving on winding roads to go to her destination every single time she’s in it, but one cannot assume she is car sick simply because of the mere fact that she gets dizzy on the bus. Therefore, the above argument would be considered strong because the premises of it and the conclusion don’t match up. For example, “She needs to check her emails frequently in order to know what is going on in her classes. Therefore, she must have access to the internet in order to not fall behind in her classes.” Those statements would be considered valid because both the premises of it and its conclusions match up and are both true.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
what makes an argument good?
Often times, people come up with many arguments that one may question its validity and whether or not it is convincing enough to accept. According to Epstein, in order for an argument to be considered valid and/or legitimate, it must exceed 3 tests. Firstly, it is essential for the principle of the argument to be reasonable; it has to be possible for it to be true. Next, it must be more plausible than the conclusion and has to give a more superior explanation as to why it is more likely for it to be correct. Although the conclusion might not actually be true, it is important that the foundation of it is more realistic and convincing than the end statement for it to be a good argument. Lastly, it is critical to identify whether an argument is considered strong or valid. A strong argument is when it is possible for the conclusion to be false even when the premises of the original idea are true, whereas a valid argument is when both the premise and the conclusion are true.
For example, one might claim the following argument: She went ice-skating. She fell down. She is bad at ice-skating. The first statements may be true because it is definitely a possibility that she went ice-skating and fell down. However, if you look at the conclusion that she is bad at ice-skating, it is not legitimate because you do not know the circumstances as to why she fell. Perhaps the ice has just been cleaned and is more slippery and watery than usual. Maybe her friend tripped her and caused her to slip. It is also possible that the blade under her ice skate had been scratched up and therefore made her balance unstable and wobbly. Whatever the situation, the above statement would not be considered a good argument.
For example, one might claim the following argument: She went ice-skating. She fell down. She is bad at ice-skating. The first statements may be true because it is definitely a possibility that she went ice-skating and fell down. However, if you look at the conclusion that she is bad at ice-skating, it is not legitimate because you do not know the circumstances as to why she fell. Perhaps the ice has just been cleaned and is more slippery and watery than usual. Maybe her friend tripped her and caused her to slip. It is also possible that the blade under her ice skate had been scratched up and therefore made her balance unstable and wobbly. Whatever the situation, the above statement would not be considered a good argument.
Friday, February 5, 2010
prescriptive claims and value judgments
Prescriptive claims and value judgments are two concepts that caught my attention as I was reading through Epstein's book. Prescriptive and descriptive claims are the two different types of claims that Epstein goes into details about. According to the author, a prescriptive claim is one that "says what should be" whereas a descriptive claim is one that "says what is." Basically what that means is that a prescriptive claim is where someone commands what needs to be done. For example, a prescriptive claim would sound something like: "you should always drink water if you want your skin to be nice." Because of the word, should, it indicates that the statement above is a command from someone else. However, a descriptive claim of that same statement would sound something like: "drinking water will keep your skin healthy and nice." It does not have any commanding tone to it, but rather more of a fact.
A value judgment, on the other hand, is similar to a prescriptive claim. The only difference is that it includes words like good, better, best, or its antonyms: bad, worse, worst. A value judgment is someone's opinion of whether something is right or wrong.
A value judgment, on the other hand, is similar to a prescriptive claim. The only difference is that it includes words like good, better, best, or its antonyms: bad, worse, worst. A value judgment is someone's opinion of whether something is right or wrong.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
vague vs. ambiguous
The terms vague and ambiguous are often confusing to people. I used to be extremely frustrated with these two words because they're so similar, yet different at the same time. A vague statement is more like a word or phrase that has an uncertain meaning to it--something that is not defined or clearly expressed. An ambiguous statement, on the other hand, is something that can have two or more meanings to it. It would be a statement where a part of it is possible to be interpreted in more than one way. For example, on Monday I was looking for a pair of ballet flats. I asked my friend for his opinion on what he thinks. He said that he liked the pair of shoes I wore on Sunday and told me to buy a similar one with a flower on it. I was confused because I don't own a pair of shoes with flowers on them. So I asked him, "You mean bow?" because that particular pair of shoes had bows on them. And then he got confused and said, "No..flower." We went on for another minute and he ended up asking, "Aren't bows like a bow and arrow?" And I started laughing and I remembered that his English is not perfect because he's only been in the states for a few years. When he said flower, he actually meant bow, but he said flower instead because he didn't know the proper word for bow. So the statement that he said would be considered ambiguous because I interpreted it differently than what he meant to say.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
subjective vs objective claims
There are two different types of claims--subjective claims and objective claims. These claims may be similar in ways, but they also have their differences. Some may be get the two mixed up, but they are actually quite easy to differentiate.
Subjective claims are statements that are based on one's personal standards. The statements made cannot be proven to be true or false. They are simply beliefs and/or opinions of oneself. An example of a subjective claim would be if someone were to say, "Your haircut is extremely cute!" That statement right there would be considered a subjective claim because it is merely someone's opinion. There is no way to prove it to be true or false.
Objective claims, on the other hand, are the opposite of a subjective claims. They are statements that are based on standards that are impersonal to oneself. Objective claims can be verified to be true or false--they are simply just facts. An example of an objective claim would be if someone were to say, "You got a haircut!" That statement can be verified to be true or false simply by just asking the person whether or not they got a haircut. Therefore, it is an objective claim.
Subjective claims are statements that are based on one's personal standards. The statements made cannot be proven to be true or false. They are simply beliefs and/or opinions of oneself. An example of a subjective claim would be if someone were to say, "Your haircut is extremely cute!" That statement right there would be considered a subjective claim because it is merely someone's opinion. There is no way to prove it to be true or false.
Objective claims, on the other hand, are the opposite of a subjective claims. They are statements that are based on standards that are impersonal to oneself. Objective claims can be verified to be true or false--they are simply just facts. An example of an objective claim would be if someone were to say, "You got a haircut!" That statement can be verified to be true or false simply by just asking the person whether or not they got a haircut. Therefore, it is an objective claim.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Intro
Hey guys! =)
My name is Pinkash. I am currently a sophomore studying Child and Adolescent Development. I live in Palo Alto and I commute by bus every day to school, which takes me about an hour. I babysit and tutor several families, and I enjoy painting, dancing, talking on the phone, hanging out with friends, watching movies, and just life in general.
Anyway, that's it for now! Nice meeting you! =)
~Pinkash
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)