The Iraqi Sunni Arab Host Population Is Not A Strategic Partner

Iraq-based Militant Group Praises Jordanian Gunsman,” Irish Examiner, 5 September 2006, (from Democratic Underground).

Iraq Parliament to Debate Federal Break-Up,” AFP, 5 September 2006, (from Democratic Undergound).

Those who support terrorism

An Iraq-based Muslim militant group today praised a Jordanian gunman for shooting foreign tourists visiting a popular Roman ruin in Amman, according to a message posted in its name on the internet.

The Mujahedeen Shura Council in Iraq, which claimed responsibility for several kidnappings of foreigners in Iraq, urged Muslim youth to follow the gunman’s steps.

It said the attack was launched on an “unblessed gathering of Jews and Christians for roaming freely in the countries of Islam”.

Those who oppose federalism and democracy

At the top of the agenda was the controversial issue of whether to allow Iraq’s provinces to merge into larger autonomous regions, a move which some Sunni Arab lawmakers fear could tear the country apart.

Other groups, however, strongly support a plan which would create virtually independent zones in the oil-rich Shiite south and Kurdish north, and leave Sunni Arabs economically isolated in the barren western desert.

The Iraqi Shia and Iraqi Kurds are strategic partners of the United States. The Iraqi Sunni Arab population is not.

It’s time to cease pretending that all populations are naturally friendly to us, and that appeasing Baathists and Qaedists is the route to victory.

On Teaching and Learning

Self-Regulation Behaviors in Underprepared (Developmental) and Regular Admission College Students,” by Kathryn Ley and Dawn Young, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1998, Vol. 23, 42-64,

Self-efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn,” by Barry Zimmerman, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2000, Vol. 25, 82-91,

Conceptions, Styles, and Approaches Within Higher Education: Analytic Abstractions and Everyday Experience,” by Noel Entwistle, Velda McCune, and Paul Walker, in Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles, 1 January 2001,

Academic Self-Efficacy and First-Year College Student Performance and Adjustment,” by Martin Chemebers, Li-tze Hu, and Ben Garcia, Journal of Educational Psychology, 2001, Vol. 93 No 1, 55-64,

Do Psychosocial and Study Skill Factors Predict College Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis,” by Steven Robbins et al, Psychological Bulletin, 2005, Vol. 130 No. 2, 261-268,

Do Psychosocial and Study Skill Factors Predict College Outcomes? Comment on Robbins et al (2004),” by Norman Weissberg and David Owen, Psychological Bulletin, 2005, Vol. 131 No. 3, 407-409,

Promiting Successful College Outcomes for All Students: Reply to Weissberg and Owen(2005)“,” by Seteven Robbins, Huy Le, and Kristy Lauver, Psychological bulletin, 2005, Vol. 131 No. 3, 410-411,

Note for class discussion. Just a couple really interesting ones

“The latter self-concept measures emphasize self-esteem reactions by posing self-evaluative questions, such as ‘How good are you at English?’ By contrast, self-efficacy items focus exclusively on task-specific performance expectations, such as ‘How certain are you that you cna diagram this sentence?’” (Zimmerman 2000 84)

I became skeptical of linguistic self-reports after my study of Coming Anarchy revealed no “Identity” correlation but found other commonalities.

“Interestingly, the variables ‘available financial resources’ and ‘hours planned on working during school’ are key predictors of admissions decisions and of academic performance in ACT’s enrollment management prediction services for 4-year postsecondary institutions.” (Robbins et al 2005 275)


“Self-regulation occurs when one uses personal (self) processes to strategically monitor and control his or her behavior and the environment.” (Ley and Young 1998 43)

“A meta-analysis with participants across K-16 revealed that improved learning outcomes resulted from learning skill interventions but, that improved outcomes were less likely when the intervention targeted a selected deficit.” (Ley and Young 1998 46)

“Study skills measured by self-report Likert items failed to predict achievement among 71 developmental students, while it did predict achievement among 168 regular admission students.” (Ley and Young 1998 47)

“An unanswered question is, can instruction be designed to compensate for poor self-regulation among underprepared or academically weak college students? A related but different research question is, what instructional interventions improve self regulation skills rather than only compensate for them?” (Ley and Young 1998 58)

“In the late 1970s, a number of researchers began to assess self-beliefs in a more tasks-specific way, and one of the most important of these efforts focused on self-efficacy.” (Zimmerman 2000 82)

“Although self-efficacy and outcome expectations were both hypothesized to affect motivation, he suggested that self-efficacy would play a larger role because ‘the types of outcomes people anticipate depend largely on their judgements of how well they will be able to perform in given situations.’” (Zimmerman 2000 83)

“Math self-efficacy was more predictive of problem solving than was math self-concept, or, for that matter, perceived usefulness of mathematics, prior experience with mathematics, or gender.” (Zimmerman 2000 85)

“Bandura (1986) has questioned the value of general control beliefs because students may feel anxious about controlling one type of subject matter or performance setting (e.g. solving mathematical problems in a limited time period) but not others.” (Zimmerman 2000 85)

“To facilitate improvements in perceived efficacy, researchers have trained students with learning and motivational deficiencies by modeling specific self-regulatory techniques, describing their form, and providing enactive feedback regarding their impact.” (Zimmerman 2000 88)

“In introducing this research area, a clear initial distinction should be made between the notion of a ‘concept,’ as an agreed category, and a ‘conception,’ as an individual construction from knowledge and experience.” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 104)

“The five categories [of learning] originally identified can be described as follows:
building up knowledge
memorizing by rote; Reproducing
acquiring facts and methods for future use
abstracting meaning for oneself; Transforming
seeking to understand reality” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 105)

“Stenberg (1997) has argued that an ability indicates what a person is able to do, whereas a style describes the way someone prefers to do it.” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 106-106)

“Matson’s (1976) naturalistic experiment produced just the deep-surface distinction, but interviews about everyday studying brought out the pervasive influence of assessment procedures on learning and studying. It was necessary to introduce an additional category — strategic approach — in which the intention was to achieve the highest possible grades by using organized study methods and effective time management.” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 108)

“The concepts identified in describing student learning have parallels in the ways academic staff teach. At the most general level are conceptions of teaching. Below that level comes styles of teaching, which indicate consistency in preferences for particular ways of teaching, rooted in personality. Approaches to teaching are more affected by specific purposes and individual teaching contexts, whereas teaching methods and techniques cover specific classroom activities.” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 122)

“I developed the practice of my teaching on the basis of my more developed view of learning and began, for example, to design and use questions in class to foster engagement, rather than as a token gesture, obtaining the ‘right answer’ from those who already know it.” (Entwistle, McCune, and Walker 2001 127)

“Bandura (1997) described self-efficacy as ‘the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to produce given attainments… Self-efficacy has been related to persistence, tenacity, and achievement in educational settings” (Chemers, Hu, and Garcia 2001 55)

“Bouffard-Bouchard (1990) and Cervone and Peake (1986) manipulated efficacy beliefs of students by providing ficticious performance norms during feedback. Students in the positive feedback (i.e., high self-efficacy) condition set higher aspirations, showed greater strategic flexibility in the search for solutions, achieved higher performance, and were more accurate in evaluating the level of their performance than were students of equal ability who received less positive feedback.” (Chemers, Hu, and Garcia 2001 56)

“There was compelling support for the role of self-efficacy and optimism in 1st-year college students’ success and adjustment.” (Chemers, Hu, and Garcia 2001 61)

“We know that a combination of high school grades and standardized achievement test s cores account for approximately 25% of the variance when predicting first-year college GPA.” (Robbins et al 2005 262).

“Harackiewicz, Barron, Tauer, and Elliot (2002) highlighted this point by finding that mastery goals predicted continued interest in college whereas performance goals predicted academic performance.” (Robbins et al 2005 265)

“Moreover, lest one think this is a minor distinction, the most recent best estimate for the number of 4-year commuter colleges as a percentage of the total number of senior colleges is 32%.” (Weissberg and Owen 2005 407)

“For example, Lichtman et al. (1989) cited a correlation between high school average and college GPA of .143 for Black students and .446 for White students, whereas Weissberg et al. (2003) found a similar disparity with a correlation of .24 for Blacks and .56 for Whites.” (Weissberg and Owen 2005 308).

“Moreover, both the College Board and the ACT have published ata in their research report series showing that there are limited, if any, racial and ethnic differences between the correlation of a standardized test score and college grades, whereas there are significant differences between high school grades and college grades.” (Robbins, Le, and Lauever 2005 411).

Congratulations Steve!

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Names Enterra Solutions
CEO Stephen F. DeAngelis as Visiting Scientist
,” Enterra Solutions, 5 September 2006,

Stephen DeAngelis, founder and CEO of Enterra Solutions, has been named a “Visiting Scientist” by Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Enterra Solutions, LLC, and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) announced today that Enterra CEO Stephen F. DeAngelis has been named a visiting scientist with the Laboratory. DeAngelis will collaborate with the Laboratory to define a strategic scientific agenda that brings together multidisciplinary areas including geopolitics, emerging threats (such as nuclear, biological and chemical weapons), advanced information technologies and knowledge management approaches.

“I am excited to strengthen Enterra’s ties to Oak Ridge,” DeAngelis said. “I look forward to building bridges between scientific disciplines to create next-generation solutions for both national security and commercial applications. This collaboration will provide an exciting venue for scientists and academics to explore how to make the world more resilient in the age of globalization.”

CEO. Scientist. Blogger. Lookin’ good, Steve.

Enterra groupies will remember that Enterra’s Senior Managing Director, grand strategist Thomas Barnett, is already involved with ORNL.