A500.3.4.RB_HaganJason

A500.3.4.RB – Explore the Hunt Library

What makes a resource “scholarly” in nature?

How is the scholarly information you found in the library different from the typical information you find when you Google a leadership concept?

Scholarly work is scrutinized by others in the field who have extensive knowledge and skills also referred to as a “peer review” (Nosich, 2012, pg. 120). The resource is normally an expert within the discipline that the work is produced. It is reasonable to assert that the work produced can be trusted. To produce a resource that is scholarly in nature the work has to go through the stringent peer review process. The peer review process validates the sources, the scholar who did the work, and of course the final produced resource. It is the most professional way to verify and validate someone’s work within the discipline. Such is not true when conducting a standard google search. The majority of resources found via a google search are from open sources that are unchallenged claims, findings, statements, opinions, emotions, or even data. The author, if revealed may not be a vetted professional in the discipline itself. The work that was done and produced did not pass through the peer review process. Most likely, depending on the source, it passed through a publishing editor. Without the resource passing through a scholarly peer review, the resource will not be free of interpretations, assumptions, opinion, or point of view. Without the scholarly review, one must first consider the source, second consider the author or publisher before committing full trust in the resource its self. It is not to say that a resource scholarly in nature is free from those shortcomings as well, but confidence is to be had when reading a resource that is scholarly in nature because it has been through peer reviews.

Best Regards,

Jason

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4^th Ed.) Pearson.

A500.2.3.RB_HaganJason

Tell Your Story

I am a husband, a father, a Soldier, an Officer, and an aviator. No matter which hat I am wearing at any given moment in my day, being reliable, consistent, effective, and well-organized are some of my personal standards. These additional standards are none negotiable and unwavering. I could draw many parallels to these standard to that of the Warrior Ethos that has bread to live inside of me. These standards are a way of life for me. As sure as the sun rises and sets every day, these standards are not something I have to manage or consciously think about applying to my daily walk. At work, the primary standards are at the cornerstone of my job. I have to be clear, accurate, relevant, and sufficient at all times. Also, depth, breadth, and precision are very important, especially when we enter into mission planning.

There is no better teacher in life than failure. When I fail to reach a goal or fail to handle something properly that has a negative result, I reflect back on several different things leading me to the failed result. I ask myself if I was focused and committed (reliable) to accomplish the task at hand? Did I put consistent work in to be prepared? Was my approach to accomplish the task effective? Was my mental focus, attitude, and preparation well-organized? If I answer no to any of these things, I can not be overly disappointed or surprised at the result. I have learned through the years that when challenge comes, my performance drops to the level in which I prepared and trained (physically and mentally). If I answered yes to all of these things and I still come up short of what was expected, then there was an outside influence that effected the outcome that was insurmountable. More often than not, when not living up to the standards of being  reliable, consistent, effective, and well-organized I failed to get out of my own way.

The primary standards play a vital roll in my professional job. I am charged with planning, briefing, and executing clandestine rotary wing (helicopter) missions in some of the most undesired places on the planet. When planning the mission, all seven critical thinking standards are employed. The mission plan has to be relevant to the ground forces mission plan. The mission planning process has been critically accurate to ensure the safety and mission goals are met. The success of the planning process and the result it produces is directly tied to the decision makers depth & breadth of understanding the mission requirements, precisely (precision) asking and gaining specific details as a need in order to reason through the mission planning process. Then, correctly identifying the complexities and underlying issues that arise. We are then in charge with briefing the mission to all the players involved in the mission. Being clear is the single most important standard for the briefer. If the plan cannot be easily understood, there will be misunderstandings, and mistakes made during the execution phase of the mission, which could cost lives or overall mission success. The briefer can not be vague or ambiguous at anytime. The briefer must have clear understanding in his own mind to ensure clear understanding in the minds of the players involved. The briefer also has to have razor sharp accuracy. The brief cannot over generalize the plan, especially during what we call the "actions-on" phase of the mission. Like I stated before, failure is the most harsh, but most important teacher in life. We have learned a lot from history. The lessons learned from mistakes made, lives lost, and missions failed are so valuable in ensuring success upon the receipt of the next mission.

The late teen and early twenty something Jason was more focused on the non-critical thinking standards. I can attest that I lived for the moment. Now, I don't believe that the non-critical thinking standards are a set-up for failure, but those standards are not strong enough to build a strong foundation on. My opinion of the non-critical thinking standards weigh too heavily on emotion or feelings. When emotions and thoughts are not even keeled, so to are these non-critical thinking standards. There are far too many outside influences that could affect this way of critical thinking. For me personally, there has been no substitute for life experiences and maturity that is derived from increased expectations and responsibilities.

I am in many ways a product of my environment when it comes to critically thinking. It is a job requirement. Some of it I believe is instinctual. Our assessment process to become a member of my team has a method of evaluating a persons critically thinking under highly demanding and stressful situations. If selected, our training further develops and refines a persons ability to critically think, not just in the cockpit, but in the mission planning process as well.

I handle what I should or should believe based on  considering what setting the information is coming from, media, a friend, family, or a co-worker. I then consider the subject. I then default to what I personally already know first and whether that remotely matches what I know to be true. Then I consider the actual source in which the information is coming from and evaluate whether the source is trusted in this topic area.

My professional job has a tremendous amount of both standardly analysis and evaluation. The mission requirements, the enemy, terrain and weather, troops and support available, time available, and civil considerations are all apart of our mission analysis. There are dozens of annual and semi-annual tasks of which I have to evaluate others to determine whether or not they are maintaining proficiency. I have to standardly evaluate their oral knowledge and flying tasks in many different environments and flight profiles of which we operate.

Best Regards,
Jason

A500.1.5.RB_JasonHagan

As this first week of class has revealed itself, there have been plenty of intellectual insights gained from both our required readings and our classroom discussion board posts. These golden nuggets of new intellectual insight have caused me to reflect on moments in my life were these truths have shown themselves. The amount of new intellectual insights and truths gained this week creates a need for perseverance just in its self. For me, when the new information flow is high, I am initially put on my back foot as I begin to process it all. It would be easy for me to become frustrated initially trying to grasp a new insight or truth. The most difficult part for me is compartmentalizing a very demanding professional career, quality family time, and now the requirements of pursuing a Masters degree. I personally don't refer to an obstacle as some immovable object. I see things through the lens of challenge. While some at work would not see my decision to pursue a Masters degree as a rational thing to due considering the landscape I am faced with at work, I have always been a person who's cadence in life is a little different than most. My family couldn't be more supportive of this decision because they have complete understanding of who I am and what drives me to achieve more in life. Between work and school, having intellectual perseverance is paramount. I know there will be great challenge that will require me to persevere in the midst of moments of difficulties, obstacles (challenge), and frustrations. 

A good leader has the capacity to compartmentalize in difficult moments in order to seek clear intellectual insights and truths. A good leader has a since of what the greater good is, allowing him or her to filter out the negative irrational opposition. A good leader realizes that there will always be opposition. A good leader has the intellectual flexibility to quickly grasp any new insight or truth in order to achieve a greater understanding, resulting in better decision making. A good leaders intellectual perseverance allows him or her to remain open minded. They are willing to learn anything from anyone because they believe that by allowing the flow of new insights or truth leads to greater understanding and insight. 

Best Regards,
Jason Hagan