Editorial - Andrews University: Fill & Download for Free

Thanks for the A2A.The biggest misconception people have about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (and when I say “people” I mean “Quorans” because that’s basically the limits of my knowledge of other people’s opinions on AOC) is this:Her degree is actually worth the paper it’s printed on.Spoiler alert: it isn’t.According to Wikipedia, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez graduated cum laude from Boston University College of Arts and Sciences in 2011, majoring in international relations and economics.Let’s talk about that cum laude for a moment.In the United States, there are three different levels of honor that can be attached to degrees. (Technically there are five, but two are rarely used). There’s cum laude (“with honor”), magna cum laude (“with great honor”), and summa cum laude (“with highest honor”).Cum laude basically means AOC did an above-average job. It’s nothing to brag about. It looks good on your LinkedIn profile page, but it’s not as impressive as magna cum laude or summa cum laude.Also according to Wikipedia, Harvard was the first United States college to begin awarding honors to graduates (in 1869). In the beginning, it was just cum laude and summa cum laude; from 1880 onwards, magna cum laude was added.The Faculty then prepared regulations for recommending candidates for the Bachelor’s degree, either for an ordinary degree or for a degree with distinction; the grades of distinction being summa cum laude, magna cum laude, and cum laude. The degree summa cum laude is for those who have attained ninety percent on the general scale, or have received Highest Honors in any department, and carries with it the assignment of an oration on the list of Commencement parts; the degree magna cum laude is for those who have attained eighty percent on the general scale, or have received Honors in any department, and carries with it the assignment of a dissertation; and the degree cum laude is to be given to those who attain seventy-five percent on the general scale, and to those who receive Honorable Mention in any study together with sixty-five percent on the general scale, or seventy percent on the last three years, or seventy-five percent on the last two.— Annual Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1877–78So basically you can graduate with honor (cum laude) as long as you are in the top 25% of your class, right?Just for kicks, I looked up Boston University’s requirements for receiving Latin honors on your degree.Among graduating seniors in each school or college, Latin Honors are awarded to the top 30% of the class as follows:Summa Cum Laude … Top 5%Magna Cum Laude … Next 10%Cum Laude … Next 15%The “break points” (GPA ranges corresponding to each of the honors categories) are determined for each school or college on February 4th of each year, based on the penultimate semester’s GPAs of the senior class; contact your school or college Graduation Office for the specific “break points.” Honors are awarded based on the graduate’s GPA at the time they are applied:- May graduates on February 4*- September graduates on September 4- January graduates on January 4*May graduates whose final semester grades improve their GPAs sufficiently to move them into a higher Latin Honors category will be assigned those honors.Latin Honors will not be given for GPAs below 3.0.Oh my. It looks like in order to graduate cum laude at BU, you just need to be in the top 30% of your class and keep your GPA above 3.0.Wow.This means that AOC could have held a B average her entire college career and still gotten that cum laude attached to her degree. Big screamin’ deal.Okay. Now let’s talk about her degree.There’s two types of Bachelor’s degrees, as I understand it: B.A. (Bachelor of Arts) and B.S. (Bachelor of Science).Boston University’s College of Arts and Sciences, according to its own fact sheet, was founded in 1873 as the College of Liberal Arts. It’s a liberal arts college and always has been. From reading its Wikipedia page and fact sheet, it looks like the College of Arts and Sciences doesn’t offer any B.S. degrees—just B.A. degrees.I was never crystal clear on what the difference was between Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts degrees, growing up. But I was under the impression that Bachelor of Arts was more…well, shallow. Airy. Academic. A B.A. degree in a particular field of study gave the holder a good overview of that field of study, I thought, and transmitted a broad sense of the discipline. But it wasn’t really a practical education—it didn’t teach you how to be a professional in that field, the way B.S. degrees did.For that reason, when I enrolled at North Dakota State University in 2004, I chose a Bachelor of Science in mass communication (and later switched to a B.S. in journalism). That’s because I wanted to learn how to be a journalist. I wanted to learn the nitty-gritty details and tricks of the trade, not just get a 30,000-foot view of the subject.I still feel as though my B.S. degree failed to prepare me for a professional life as a journalist. My first job out of college—as an editorial assistant at my hometown newspaper—lasted barely a month. I was fired for “not being ready.” (Translation: “not knowing how to be a reporter.”)Perhaps I was never meant to be a journalist. But I will say this about my B.S. degree courses at NDSU: instead of just learning about the history of journalism and the ethics of it and all that hypothetical crap, I was actually learning how to be a reporter: pyramid structure (for news writing) and the rule of thirds (in photojournalism) and all that jazz. That’s what my B.S. degree taught me. I don’t think a B.A. degree in journalism would have prepared me to work as a reporter nearly as well.While writing this answer, I did some research, just to make sure my impressions were correct. It seems they were:What is the Difference Between a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Sciences?BACHELOR OF ARTS (BA)A Bachelor of Arts degree offers students a broader education in their major. Students are required to take a variety of liberal art subjects such as humanities, literature, history, social sciences, communications, and a foreign language. Students can select from a diverse list of courses that fulfill each liberal arts requirement. This allows students to actively mold their education to their interests. A BA degree provides a more diverse education in a particular major, therefore, a BA degree generally requires less credits than a BS degree. For example, the University of Washington (UW) offers a BA and BS in Psychology. A BA in Psychology from UW requires less mathematics and statistics courses than a BS in Psychology.BACHELOR OF SCIENCES (BS)A Bachelor of Science degree offers students a more specialized education in their major. Generally, a BS degree requires more credits than a BA degree because a BS degree is more focused in the specific major. Students are required to focus on studying their major at a more in-depth level. Students have fewer chances to take classes outside of their major. A BS degree is generally offered in technical and scientific topics like engineering, technology, mathematics, computer science, nursing, and biochemistry. Although a BS degree is generally offered in scientific degrees, many schools offer BS degrees in specialized fields, for example, Northeastern University offers a BS degree in Music with a concentration in Music Industry.There ya go. B.A. degrees are broader and less focused than B.S. degrees. They provide a more diverse overview of a particular major, but don’t go in-depth. Students in B.A. programs take a wide variety of classes in different subjects: humanities, literature, history, social sciences, etc. (Stuff that has almost nothing to do with their field of study.) They can pick and choose courses to fulfill the requirements of their major, “molding their education to their interests.”I think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez got ripped off. Or rather, she ripped herself off. For $70,000 a year, she wound up with a B.A. degree in two academic disciplines that she probably should have gotten a B.S. degree in instead. At the very least, she should have picked some different courses in the process of acquiring her B.A. degree—you know, maybe some courses that actually focused more on economics.Because AOC don’t know jack about economics.The Economic Illiteracy of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - QuilletteSocialist Ocasio-Cortez Bragged About Her Economics Degree Before Pushing False Economic DataMaybe she didn’t rip herself off, though. Maybe Boston University ripped her off. Maybe the quality of education there is so poor that she couldn’t help but graduate nearly as ignorant as she was when she matriculated.Boston University’s Fake-o-Nomics Darling | National ReviewHere’s a quote from a different article, this one on Fox News (I don’t care how you feel about Fox News, by the bye—this is pertinent and sagacious):So what is a college degree worth these days? Millennial congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez majored in Economics and graduated cum laude from a private university that costs nearly $70,000 per year. Since entering Congress, she has struggled to articulate even basic economic concepts.Last month, AOC blocked Amazon from relocating tens of thousands of jobs near her congressional district because she failed to understand the difference between a tax incentive and a slush fund. On Tuesday, during congressional testimony, Ocasio-Cortez appeared bemused as Wells Fargo CEO explained the basic function of a bank. If Ocasio-Cortez represents the quality of an Economics degree from BU, the university should lose its accreditation.The liberal arts enable us to understand and earn our liberty. Unlike professional and mechanical education, the liberal arts do not train students for any particular job. They are literally the arts of freedom, and no society that abandons liberal education can remain free for long. Unfortunately, the left’s decades-long effort to subvert liberal education through pseudo-academic disciplines, administrative bloat, and outright censorship have transformed even our nation’s most elite universities into little more than decadent indoctrination camps.So there you are. Ocasio-Cortez’s blisteringly obvious ignorance of even the most basic economic principles seems to prove that either (a) she paid $70,000 a year to an institution that, thanks to leftist politicization, is incapable of instilling even a scintilla of correct information into its students’ heads, or (b) she chose to study international relations and economics at a liberal arts college instead of a university which offered more in-depth B.S. degrees in those academic disciplines, or (c) she chose all the wrong courses at BU and her studies lacked the focus and depth necessary to properly train her in international relations and economics.Or possibly (d) a combination of all three.Either way, folks, you can stop trying to defend her with this old canard:“But she graduated cum laude from Boston University with a degree in economics!”To which I reply:“Fat lot of good it did her.”

From here…Meaning of IQ Test ScoresMost of us are fascinated by the concept and measurement of IQ (intelligence quotient) - the measurement of a person's level of intelligence. Most people reading this will consider themselves to be above average intelligence - and quite rightly if they choose The Sunday Independent. But read on and get an instant inferiority complex. A recent monthly meeting of the Johannesburg branch of Mensa at the Old Edwardians Club in Houghton - Mensa being the international society for those who score in the top 2 percent in a standard IQ test - learnt exactly what certain levels of IQ mean. The speaker was Garth Zietsman, 46, who works at the Standard Bank head office in downtown Johannesburg as director of psychometrics and intelligence. He has been described as "the smartest man in the world" on the strength of having scored 185 in the Mega-IQ test, which is a particularly challenging IQ test. He told The Star last month he did "Okay" at school but was often in trouble. No man has scored higher. But a woman has. The Guinness Book of Records Hall of Fame says Marilyn vos Savant (59) has an IQ of 228, the highest ever measured. On the scale discussed here, it was 186-190. She is a journalist and TV personality. She became bored with university after two years, and took up real-estate selling and investment for five years in order to make enough money to indulge in freelance writing.Both Vos Savant and Zietsman are Mensans. In describing the meaning of specific IQs, Zietsman gave Johannesburg Mensans the following analyses which, because of pressure of space, have been greatly shortened. So, just how bright are you? And what level of IQ are politicians, policemen, professors and teachers?IQ below 12Functioning is absolutely minimal... incapable of self-maintenance in any way. Can't even be toilet-trained.Between 12 and 28Profound retardation. Once known as "idiots", this group are without understanding or ordinary mental capacity. Need constant care and supervision. An IQ of 20 is the beginning of a semblance of humanity - cats are at this level.28 to 44Severely retarded. Once called "imbeciles". Congenitally weak-minded, they cannot profit from academic training at all, cannot be employed in sheltered workshops and must be supervised domestically. Demonstrate little or no social and communication skills but they can be trained in basic health habits. Smart dogs are estimated to have IQs at this level.44 to 60Moderately retarded. Limited support is essential and with extended special education a maximum of Grade four could be attained by age 18. Their thinking does not involve much in the way of logic. Their ethical thinking has to involve conditioning, but there is the beginning of a quid pro quo sort of morality. Their social and communication skills are fair but there is little self-awareness. They can function vocationally in a sheltered workshop (and perhaps lawn-mowing, if you don't mind them losing fingers). Cannot live independently. Average adult chimpanzee has a general intelligence level corresponding to this category.60 to 76(Mental age 12 for adults) Mildly retarded. Once called "morons" or "feeble-minded". With special education, a maximum of grade six is possible by age 18. Are inevitably functionally illiterate even if they have been taught to read for at least four years. Real (if superficial and concrete) logic appears in this category.Conventional morality also begins to appear - this group perceive as good whatever pleases significant others and the bad as anything that displeases them. At least some intermittent outside assistance is necessary. Their communication and social skills are reasonable. (By social/communication this does not refer to negotiation skills or wit, but basics such as washing hands, dressing, brushing teeth, using toilet paper, looking at the person addressing them and finding the local doctor.) They are socially and vocationally adequate (at menial labour) given special training and supervision. Many are able to lead a relatively independent life. At an IQ of 70 or below the law regards them as being too stupid to know the difference between right and wrong.76 to 92Dull. Life is tough at this level. Learning is slow, simple and needs to be supervised closely to be effective. With application they may graduate from primary school but will flounder badly in high school. Those with IQs below 80 will probably never be functionally literate and the rest will not understand anything more complex than a popular magazine. Their reasoning is very superficial. Morality is of a primitive conventional sort - good and bad depends on how significant others view good and bad. The vast majority of serious social problems are associated with people in this category because there are so many of them and they are just smart enough to be let loose. People in this category commit about 75 percent of all petty and violent crimes. Anything other than unskilled labour is a trial, though simple semi-skilled work is possible.92 to 108Mediocre - the average person. Learning varies from explicit coaching with hands-on experience to study guides and textbook work with some practical experience. They should be able to deal with a high school curriculum and graduate, but even with hard work won't do well enough to enter university. Their reading level is, at best, news stories (not editorials), popular magazines and novels. Morality is conventional - a matter of serving the social order and tradition or doing your duty as defined by some authority - church, teacher, parent or state. Able to function at the level of skilled blue-collar, clerical, sales or police work. This large group are the glue of society, but, given the wrong authority, they will do horrible things in the name of morality.108 to 124Bright. They can learn via the typical university format of lectures and textbooks. They would struggle at, but sometimes graduate from, university. Their best reading level is editorials, magazines such as Time and The Economist, and classical novels. Abstract, "what-if" hypothetical thinking begins in this group but is still superficial. Principled morality also begins in this group, that is, they can see there are non-arbitrary principles or laws that should govern ethical behaviour and thought. They can also see that these laws are social constructs and have not come down from heaven or any other ultimate authority. Their best work level is that of most teachers, low- to middle-level management and military officers, sub-standard to fair professionals and some elected national or provincial politicians. This group makes up the moral, intellectual and practical leadership assistants of society.124 to 140Superior. This category and all those above them don't require assistance to learn. They can find the information and master the methods themselves. Capable of postgraduate work, including PhDs, but may struggle with a few subjects such as postgraduate mathematics, physics and philosophy. Reading philosophy and legal tracts with comprehension is possible. Morality is decidedly a matter of principles for this group but nevertheless they tend to accept established systems - rarely is the principled system a self-chosen one. This group forms the bulk of the better doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants and other professionals, United States presidents, CEOs of large companies and academics. Tend to be the keepers, and transmitters of knowledge and the higher points of any culture, but can't create it themselves.140 to 156Brilliant. Highly regarded original academic work rarely occurs with lower IQs. Some in this group exceed the average university student in academic competence while still in primary school. They garner most academic honours such as Rhodes scholarships and maths Olympiads. They can read anything and probably read philosophy for pleasure. Most professional mathematicians, physicists, philosophers and judges or very senior counsel can be found in this group. Many Nobel laureates and some historical geniuses - like Sartre - are also to be found here. People in this category make up society's intellectual leaders. Most original ideas start with these people. However their contribution tends to be in bits and pieces rather than a whole new system or new way of seeing things. One in 1000 people reach an IQ of 148.156 to 172Genius. Most exceed the average postgraduate in academic competence - even professors - while still in primary school and probably knew more than their teachers from about grade four. They can and do read philosophy for pleasure well before puberty and can read at the university level before the average person can comprehend a primary reader (that is, "I see a cat"). The smarter Nobel Prize winners and most historical geniuses (people such as Einstein, Hawkins, Byron, Milton, Kant, Newton, Bertrand Russell, Ayn Rand) are to be found in this category. They are the source of virtually all of humanity's advances. A common experience with people in this category or higher is that they are not wanted - the masses (including the professional classes) find them an affront of some sort. Fortunately, they are plentiful in absolute numbers - South Africa probably has about 1 500 - so many of them do rise above the envy and hostility.172 to 188Freakish. While still of primary school age, only around one in 1000 professors can look them in the eye intellectually. They tend to read competently before they are three years old. Keynes - who used to intimidate Russell - was probably in this category. Zietsman believes that FW Nietzsche, the German philosopher and poet, and Hugo de Groote, a jurist, were others. Michael Kerney, who holds the world record as the youngest university graduate ever at 10 years old, probably also has an adult IQ around 186 on this scale. Only one in a million people are this intelligent. They are seldom understood or appreciated. Most feel profoundly isolated from society - even when they are appreciated. A large proportion of this group opt out of society and never make revolutionary contributions in the standard academic fields or professions. It seems to be very difficult to motivate them to play the academic/scholarly/professional game because they regard even the most venerable of traditions and institutions as absurd or silly. Consider that even the mind of the average professor appears to them like the mind of the average bricklayer would appear to the professor.IQ over 188In all of history only about a dozen people have been this smart. Zietsman says: "I know of only one case for sure. William James Sidis lectured Harvard mathematicians on four-dimensional mathematics at age 11 and was a professor of mathematics at Rice University at age 14. "He easily mastered many more languages than the then 'world record' of around 40. He would do the entire New York Times crossword in his head. "Because of his eccentricities, academics and the press mercilessly hounded him. At the age of 22 he published a book discussing black holes a full 15 years before Nobel laureate astrophysicist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar thought of them. "He eventually refused to do anything academic or have anything to do with academic society. Who knows what these people think about the rest of humanity?"

I've worked in PR for over 23 years - and I've seen these multipliers range from 2 to 10. There isn't and never was ANY sound, logical basis for arguing what the multiplier figure should be - or that there should be a multipler figure at all.The reality is that the multiplier figure is usually chosen on the basis of what the client will accept - so if you can get away with a multiplier of 50, good for you.In the past. I've known agencies who would vary the multiplier figure from client to client ie if you had an uninteresting client with little newsworthy material, get them to accept a higher multiplier figure in order to boost the value of the paltry mentions generated for them.It all stems from a decades long inferiority complex that the PR sector has suffered in comparison to the big boys of advertising. Here's how the argument runs:Positive editorial is more valuable than advertising (this appears to be accepted almost as a universal law).So if you compare advertising and editorial column inches on the basis of space occupied, then you have to somehow account for the fact that 12 inches of editorial must be more valuable than the equivalent ad space (ignoring for the moment all the issues that this obscures in terms of positive, neutral and negative coverage; how much space is actually devoted to the client, etc).Hence you have to multiply it by a figure. In which case, you can pick any figure you like so long as your client buys it.And therein hangs the eternal issue with advertising value equivalence - PR is justified by a comparison to a different discipline that operates by a different set of rules. The AVE/multiplier has always been a ropey way to measure the value of PR - and when clients finally see through the smoke and mirrors of a multiplier (and they always do), then it doesn't aid the cause of justifying the real value of PR.The traditional get out clause for PR has been that the only way to measure the impact of a campaign is to take a benchmark of attitudes and behaviour of the audience at the start - and then return afterwards to see whether or not 'the needle has moved' . However, the cost of such an exercise has always been seen as prohibitive - ie the measurement tail wagging the activity dog. When push comes to shove, clients in the past would rather spend money on 'doing something' - even if that means being unsure about how to truly understand and measure the value of the activity.The PR industry has always known that AVEs were a cop out - with the industry's main bodies fully committed to killing the beast, the best thing we can all do is to try and make it happen as quickly as possible.