Introvert and Extrovert Leader Debate

On Introverts, Extroverts and Leadership

September 24th, 2011

(led by Lee Je Woo, transcript provided by Miss Morrow. She apologizes for any misquotes. Initials are provided when possible, but may be incorrect. If you wish to have your name/initials removed, contact Miss Morrow).

 We started watching this EBS Video around 10:30:
The whole series is interesting. I encourage you to watch it during your own time

1)    Are you and introvert or an extrovert?

LJW: Introvert. JSJ: Not sure. Extro, intro? KSJ: Introvert. LKM: Half and half. When I see my friends, I want to join them, but sometimes I prefer to be alone. LWC: Extrovert; I like talking. YHY: Introvert. KJW: I think most people have both sides, especially when people are afraid of speaking in front of others. Everyone has both, it’s just whatever’s most dominant.

2)    What are some of the good or bad things of being introverted or extroverted?

LJW: When I can’t speak well, sometimes I feel lonely; I’m bad at expressing myself, but I think deeply before speaking. It’s better to have more time to enjoy my hobbies.

: I’m an extrovert, so I’m friendly but sometimes I hurt people because I speak too directly.

: I’m an introvert. This makes me a good listener. I tend to be more serious. Disadvantages: I don’t have a sense of humor and I find it difficult to help my friends when they have a hard time.

: I am both an introvert and an extrovert. I have broader relationships with others, but I don’t have much time to think about myself.

KDY: I’m an extrovert. I like to go out and chat. This is good because I have lots of friends and some humor. Sometimes it’s bad because I don’t think too much before talking, so sometimes I go too far when talking with friends and I waste a lot of studying time.

3)    Have you ever been a leader? Why did you want to be one?

LJW:  I wanted to be a leader because their voices are heard, listened to, they get to make decisions, and I thought I could change myself from being introverted to extroverted. It worked.

KMS: Me, too. I was a class leader for three years. At first it was difficult. I knew that I had critical ideas but I was shy to share them. But then as a leader I became more extroverted. I learned more about people, but maybe became more like a dictator, so now I’m an extrovert trying to become more of an introvert.

CML: I’m an introvert, so I listen well, but I have a more difficult time being humorous. I’m changing a little.

PSH: I had no time to be a leader in middle school, but I envied my class leader, so I determined to be a leader and interact with more people.

LKM: I was a leader in elementary school, but not in middle/high school. In elementary school, I was really excited and enjoyed having an elevated heartbeat. I liked to present in front of an audience, but in MS/HS, it can be dangerous. A leader can be a really important role, so I didn’t do it.

KDY: I was also a leader in elementary school, but I preferred to step back and see what leaders are doing. It’s too stressful, but I like to lead group projects.

KSJ: Last year I was the vice-leader of the 1-6 class. I did it because I’d never had the chance in middle school, but in H.S. it was a big step to becoming more like an extrovert. I felt really nervous, but it was a chance to learn a lot and get some great experiences. It was a great opportunity.

4)    Difficulties of being a leader

LWJ: In my case, sometimes I must ask my classmates to correct their behavior, which sounds like a command, which is bad. And I must be very careful not to break rules, even when I’m just having fun.

KMS: I tend to break rules. A lot. And I get noticed by teachers a lot. As a leader, responsibility means greater punishment. Also, leaders have to listen to 40 different opinions and should embrace them all.

JSJ: Choosing an opinion to suit everyone is hard. There is no definite right or wrong way to do something ,but you have to do your best.

PSH: Taking responsibility is tough and going o the teacher to hear about everything. Some have loud voices, some have quiet, but they all have opinions and you should make decisions for them all.

CML: They expect president/v.president to do everything for them, especially cleaning. They try to avoid their own responsibility.

PSH: I represent the class, even I don’t think so, so I shouldn’t sleep in class.

5)    Which makes a better leader: an introvert or an extrovert?

KSJ: Introverts ,because they prepare more because they are more nervous. And introverts understand other introverts, so they know other people aren’t always confident talking, but want their opinions heard. It’s not a disadvantage, and you can get more comfortable as a leader. You can get over the abilities you lack, but the skill set for being a leader is very large, so there are many things that introverts do that can help them be good leaders.

: I agree that an introvert can be a good leader, but extroverts can be a better one. Being a leader means standing in front, and extroverts can be good at encouraging others. Introverts can be good about caring about others, but sometimes you need to be harsh.

LWC: Introverted can do things well in their own way. People can lead with whatever style.

KMS: I think a leader’s most important ability is to communicate with others, extracting potential and ideas from other people. Drawing out ideas and opinions of others is an important trait. Some say that introverts can communicate in other ways, but real understanding comes from face-to-face talking. So I think the talking ability of extroverts is a great advantage. Introverts pass up on chances to know others because they are shy. Also, sometimes they are more likely to make decisions more slowly, but good fast decision skills are important.

YH: I think face-to-face is the basic way to have communication with others. Extroverted people can act more quickly, especially with sudden happenings or surprising events. I think being extroverted is more beneficial.

M.L.: Before discussion, I thought being extroverted was more beneficial, but after the video and discussion, I think introverted is better because I think they spend more time to make a better decision for everyone. An extrovert might be too active and people may not be comfortable following them.

SP:I agree – an extroverted leader can be too active, but I think a CEO should have a lot of experience. I think an introvert might be good at thinking, but not have as many experiences.

HY: Extroversion is better. Lots of people have opinions and in order to gather and make decisions, you need to be tough and sometimes hard, and I think extroverts tend to be those things more.

KM: I think different situations call for different types of leaders. But I think extroverts might be better. I prefer democratic leadership, so they must communicate and here in a way that is effective and fair. What comes from the heads of all people is better than what comes from the mind of one.

DY: Extroverts have more courage to infuriate and encourage other people’s voices and/or quiet voices that are too loud. Introverts tend to listen more, but I think that can be too confusing.

JSJ: Out of the two different personalities, introverts tend to be more logical and extroverts are usually more emotionally. I think extroverts’ best ability is to inspire people in one direction for something. It’s better to have the big picture rather than many small details.

PSH: I agree but I think responsibility and capability are the most important. I think extroverts have greater advantages to be a leader easily. I think either personality can be a great leader, but extroverts find it easier to be a great one.

MAFIA Game

**Originally played in July**

Mafia is a role-playing game. Everyone has a role and makes decisions based upon their role.


Game Process
In the game, there are "nights" and "days." During nighttime, everyone sleeps. Some roles wake up during the night. During the day, everyone wakes up and the Narrator tells us who died. Then everyone must try to find out who is the Mafia, have a trial, and execute them.


Roles
Narrator/MC is in charge of telling people what happens next
Mafia vs. Everyone else

• Mafia – choose person to die each day
• Doctor – choose one person to save each day
• Police – choose one person to “investigate” (ask the MC if he/she is mafia)
• Townspeople – nothing special

Miss Morrow's Crazy Rules & Roles

• Super Mafia - one of the Mafia players who also picks an extra person to die each turn. Goal: be the last Mafia alive.
• Terrorist - a townsperson. If this person dies, they pick someone else who also dies.
• Sniper - townsperson who can kill one player, just once
• Mayor - elected by the townspeople who gets 2x for executions (this person can be Townsperson, Mafia, or any other role!!!)
• Matchmaker - townsperson at the beginning of game picks two "Lovers"
• Lovers - picked by the Matchmaker, if one Lover dies, the other one also dies. Their goal is to keep each other alive.(Lovers can also be Mafia or any other role!!). 

How to Play & How to Win

• Repeat the night time/day time cycle
• Mafia win when they outnumber the townspeople
• Townspeople win when the mafia have all died
• Super Mafia wins by killing all the townspeople AND being the only mafia member leftž
• Lovers win by both staying alive

Personality Test: Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Myers-Briggs Test

Please answer “yes” or “no” to each question. 

There is no correct answer.  Please answer honestly.

Part A

1.You usually say your opinion (의견) during group discussions (그룹토론 ).

2. You are usually the first person to react (대답) to a sudden phone call or unexpected question (예상치 못한 질문).

3. You would rather sit near the front of the classroom.

4. You feel sad if you don’t see or speak to people often.

5. You feel happy and have more energy after meeting friends.

If you answered Yes to most of the sentences, you are an Extrovert (외향적) (E).    

If you answered no, you are an Introvert (내향적) (I).

Part B:

1. You are more worried (걱정하는) about the future (미래) than the present (현재).

2.  You would rather look at many options.  (You do not act quickly.)

3. Your desk at school is messy (지저분한).

4. You prefer doing a crossword puzzle to making something with your hands

5. You prefer to experiment (실험하다) with things, instead of following traditions (전통을 따르다 ).

If you answered yes, you are Intuitive  (직관형) (N).

If you answered no, you are Sensing (분별형) (S)

Part C:

1. You are not easily affected by (감정적인 영향을 받다) TV soap operas

2. You rarely buy something just because you like it. You carefully consider (고려하다) what you need more than what you like

3. You would take a job promotion (승진), even if you don’t like the work environment (직업환경 )

4. You usually tell people the truth, even if it may hurt their feelings (그들의 감정을 상하게 하다 )

5. You think justice (정의) is more important than mercy (자비)

If you answered yes, you are  Thinking (사고형) (T) 

If you answered no, you are  Feeling (감정형) (F)

Part D:

1. You make lists (목록표) of things to do

2. You are rarely late for appointments and usually schedule things in advance (미리서 할 일을 계획하다)

3. You like giving instructions (지시하다) to people.

4  You don’t like sudden changes.

5. You don’t like to delay (미루다) work, so you usually complete tasks on time

If you answered yes, you are Judging (판단형) (J)

If you answered no, you are a Perceiving (지각형) (P)

AGORA: "Should Palestine Become an Independent State?"

“Should Palestine Become an Independent State”

Selections from the debate by AGORA at Sadaebugo

3^rd of September, 2011

: It would be a big problem for peace in the Arab states. It would be ruled by Hamas, which is very hostile to Arabs.

: We should respect Palestine’s rights. Basically what they call Israel is invaders.

: Do you know what Hamas is? It’s Palestine’s armed political party. It is interrupting peace negotiations between Palestine and Israel.

: People oppose [the creation of a state] because Palestine is violent and not a fixed government.

: Should we upset the Bible’s promises of Israel? There was the diaspora, then the Holocaust, the UN helped create Israel and agreed that it should be a state, but there were people there already, so three more wars ensued.

: Did they have a nation there before? After WWI, England made a promise to Israel and to Palestine.

: If Palestine has their own government, now they merely need land?

: This is not an easy issue because it’s related to religion, too. Fighting over Jerusalem is often a religious issue. Strong counties are staying quiet and don’t want to get involved. The U.S., however, supports Israel.

: Other counties need to step in. Israel’s claims and evidence are questionable. England made promises when Palestine was actually just a colony and its rights were trampled. This was done because of guilt associated with the Holocaust.

: How are we to solve this? Should we leave them alone or intervene? What is the best way to pursue peace?

: Like how should land be divided?

: Do we leave it? Or do we create 2 and leave Jerusalem alone?

: I wouldn’t be very happy dividing it; it’s a very sensitive issue as a religious site.

: Palestine wants Jerusalem included, as well, because of its own religion. But the world can’t settle the religious issues at hand – they have to work it out themselves. Maybe keep Jerusalem neutral?

: There will be more conflicts and war. Now there is no government, but if there is, they could war over it.

: Arab countries historically don’t give rights to Jews. Saudi Arabia doesn’t even let them become citizens, but Israel is better at integrating Arabs. We should support Israel in finding a solution on this issue.

: So you don’t agree? Palestine shouldn’t be its own country.

: No, it has its rights. Actually, Israel ignored a lot of UN resolutions by building illegal settlements in the occupied area.

: It’s really tricky!

Personality Tests

Personality Test #1:

Imagine you are having  busy day at home. Many things need your attention at one time:

• Your baby is crying
• The faucet (tap) is leaking water
• The phone is ringing
• Your laundry (clothes) are hanging outside and it will rain soon.
• Someone is knocking on your door.

What do you do first?

AGORA Debate: Is Immersion the Best Way to Learn a Language?

“Is Immersion the Best Way to Learn a Language?”

AGORA Debate on the 12^th of June, 2011

Pro: KilMook, JaeWon, DoYeon, MiRang, Suji

Con: JeWoo, SeJin, MinJi, SolPit, SuJin

Pro: We must define what we mean when we talk about the target language? A study done by Baker surveyed 1000 students. He found that early immersion students lagged behind for the first few years in literacy and then they caught up. There were no negative impacts on their first language. It’s also effective for improving cognitive skills as they develop.

Con: It takes too much time – it’s more effective to learn the basic structure of a new language in your mother tongue.

Pro: But these are skill sets for a global society. Even though it takes time, it’s worth it.

Con: Immersion education is expensive and will further demonstrate the gap between the rich and poor. This type of education may cost and need a lot of money to be effective. If I am poor, then I can’t be in this type of program because it is too expensive.

Pro: If you look at public resources, it’s free. If public schools implement this type of language instruction, it helps keep the private industry problem minimal.

Con: Even so, there is limited support from the government for these types of programs. Not all schools can afford this type of education. If we change it, it could devastate the national school system.

Pro: But if we do it in Korea, it helps all. If we don’t, it increases privatization and studying abroad.

Pro: The next best thing is studying abroad. It can help bring both culture and language. Everyone deserves the opportunity to have that rich experience.

Con: There are opportunities to go so without going abroad, especially as we are a technological society. We can experience cultures and languages abroad through technology. Moreover, there are social issues present with immersion via studying abroad with things like the goose father phenomenon. We would need to find other ways to have cultural experiences to reduce social problems if too many people go overseas to live and study.

Pro: In what other ways?

Con: Technology!

Pro: But it’s limited. It is a technological society, but you need higher English levels to access that information. So many documents are in English, so it becomes a huge waste of time to translate documents [in order to gain cultural knowledge].

Con: There are other activities outside of class that can be used to enhance language ability.

Pro: Including going abroad?

Con: I think we’re defining immersion too narrowly as going abroad. If immersion includes activities inside classrooms, then I think we can move in a different direction.

Pro: Yes, we are focusing on going abroad, but we also support programs in schools that use the target language for instruction.

Con: I think we could divide the topic as abroad and classroom programs. Obviously there are problems with going abroad. Students then have trouble adapting to home culture.

Pro: Studying overseas is much more of a cultural advantage. Not only do you experience the country’s academic and language offerings, but you also interact with the people you study with. It’s more diverse. And you are not likely to forget your own culture.

Con: But it happens.

Pro: But being abroad to study another language, going abroad 1 or 2 years doesn’t really affect you culture or identity in a negative way.

Con: Maybe short term it appears to have no effect, but long term can have an effect as you adapt. It can make it more difficult to fit back into our own culture.

Pro: But in this global society, overcoming culture shock is as important as learning a language.

Con: Should we all go, then? It’s very expensive, and cost is an important thing to consider. What would you suggest for cost? Yes, it might have a good effect, but what about paying for it?

Pro: English immersion and other language immersion is being surrounded by the language for a significant amount of time. Actually learning the language becomes more realistic that way. Going abroad is just one way.

Con: So KAIST-styled English classes is the way to go?

Pro: English in the classroom is an effective tool to learn language instead of learning it from a Korean friend.

Con: So KAIST is a type of immersion program disadvantage. The gap between rich and poor is present, as is the intensity of immersion sometimes has tragic consequences.

Con: Besides, many people feel they’re left behind by English immersion classes and will try to catch up by going to academies, which costs more money.

Pro: Immersion can lower academy enrollment rates because only learning English at school doesn’t make English perfect. Now we see that those who go abroad generally have better English ability and those who don’t are less confident.

Pro: According to Student International Language Teacher of the year, studies show immersion increases critical thinking, creativity, mental flexibility. Scores for verbal and math on standardized tests went up. I think language immersion develops better skills that help other subjects in the long term.

Pro: There are also different levels of immersion: total and partial. Total is 100% and partial is 50% when you learn only some material in the target language. You can take leveling tests to determine which one a student should take. In middle school, there were three different English levels and you could pick which one you wanted to take. I think the KAIST case did not offer such flexibility.

Con: So your solution is leveled classes with different amounts of immersion teaching? What is the difference between what you just described and what we do now?

Con: What you described has a lot of limitations, including financial. What is spent on these programs and how are they paid for. Even though this happens currently in schools, there might be some misperceptions, especially with cultural knowledge. We can’t just put foreigners in every class, but we can’t have Korean teachers transmit American culture because they may not all be informed on it.

Pro: So the internet can supplement responsible teachers. Young students can get this information in this technological age. And not all foreign language teachers are professional or should be teaching in a classroom.

Con: Korean education has a lot of paradoxes. Politicians are focused on getting good poll results from people, not students. So they adopt measures that are not for the benefit of students. Immersion in schools may have problems, but they don’t think about it. Level tests are okay, but they are limited, so we need a better solution. As for delivering culture, the best would be to get all Americans (or foreigners) to do the teaching but we can’t. But Koreans teaching will result in cultural misconceptions. Going abroad is too expensive, plus the wild goose father problem. I think we need to focus on learning our language and culture first. We learn English to communicate with people and because America and other English-speaking countries are powerful.

Pro: Culture is just one advantage of immersion. We do it to learn the language, which immersion is helpful for. Culture is being overemphasized here.

Con: Culture is important.

Pro: Immersion doesn’t mean erasing culture, it means learning language.

Con: What I mean by immersion in the classroom is that they can teach you language, but that process can create stereotypes and bad language habits. Example: how many SouthEast Asians speak English. Their English is so varied that native speakers can’t understand them. I worried that we don’t have more professional native English teachers, we will develop our own language and not English as most of the world speaks it. When Korean English teachers deliver information about language, it does indirectly teach us about culture, too.

Pro: I’m still not getting your objections to culture.

Con: Perfect immersion might be good, but we can’t achieve it. Political environment needs to improve.

Con: Koreans can’t give us a truly accurate picture of America.

Pro: Going abroad costs too much, Koreans can’t teach us enough about America, so students don’t get the right idea. So what solutions do you have?

Pro: Also on stereotypes: unprofessional native teachers can teach us wrong stereotypes. Also, if students are afraid of foreigners, then they won’t learn. They are more comfortable learning from Koreans.

Pro: You disagree with going abroad, and immersion doesn’t seem compatible, but it can help more than learning from a Korean.

One conclusion: Immersion’s goal is to learn language. And some teachers may not be professional, but if they are selected and approved by the government, then we have to trust them.

Defining immersion as going abroad becomes problematic.

Con: In Korea, actual meaning of immersion seems to be going abroad or having all English classes.

Pro: Identity is being determined in middle school and high school. One or two years overseas can help you develop a more cultured personality.

Con: Personal anecdote: my brother moved back to Korea after living in America for a few years nd had all sorts of problems adjusting. During early development, maybe one or two years can a big impact on acquiring language skills. During that time, students should be able to acquire their own culture and develop.

Pro: Not everyone has such issues adapting. Culture shock happens, but you can learn from other cultures and widen the way you think.

Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet"

"Love Story" by Taylor Swift

Movie Trailer for 1996 movie with Leonardo DiCaprio

Student-Made Movie Trailer for 1968 movie

Flip-book of Romeo and Juliet

Prologue:

Two households, both alike in dignity,
In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life;
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents' strife.
The fearful passage of their death-mark'd love,
And the continuance of their parents' rage,
Which, but their children's end, nought could remove,
Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage;
The which if you with patient ears attend,
What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend

Words defined:

¨Two households  = two families, Montague and Capulet

¨Verona = the city where the story takes place

¨Grudge = bad feelings towards someone

¨Blood = fight! murder

¨Foes  = enemies

¨star-cross'd = ill-fated or unlucky

¨take their life = suicide L

¨bury their parents' strife  = their parents aren’t fighting anymore

¨death-mark'd love = love that will end in death

¨children's end = their children (Romeo and Juliet) die

¨traffic of our stage = the play

**Disclaimer: I do not own any of these videos. I showed them in my class for educational purposes only.