SELF CONFIDENCE

The class started with the discussion on "REASONS FOR LACK OF SELF CONFIDENCE".

KARAN stated that people tend to lose their confidence when they
they think too much about the outcome,they get nervous and lose their self confidence and as a result of which they fail in performing their task well.AVINASH agreed with KARAN and gave example of stage fear.Admitting the fact that he shared the same, he said that people are afraid that others might make fun of them in case they faltered.DEVBRAT added that when we care too much about what others are going to say about us our concentrate on taking care that we dont make a fool of ourselves in front of all rather than focusing on doing our available best.SHRIYYA said that failures can break our confidence
The group then discussed situations in which we lose our confidence;

1. PUBLIC SPEAKING:

Avinash said that even after practice if some people go on stage they go blank .TRINATH expressed that as SHRIYYA had plenty of stage appearances she experienced no stage fear.
Probing into possible solutions of the problem ,group came up with some ideas.
Sir suggested considering the whole gathering as a single person .Devbrat suggested considering the crowd as a whole herd of buffaloes.Sir modified it again and suggested considering the crowd as clones of one single acquaintance.KAUSHIK suggested that we should not care at all about the result as it tend s to make us self conscious.Devbrat expressed that we think that people will poke fun at us for a long time or think that we are incompetent but actually others are too absorbed in their work to be bothering about others.In the end it was concluded that it is better to think just about doing our best and not caring about the outcome.Trinath suggested that doing the same job again and again helps in overcoming the fear.

2.OPINION MANIPULATED BY OTHERS:

Sir said that sometimes our opinions are mainpulated by others both in a positve way and sometimes in a negative way.The other sir quoted an example from his school days in which he and his had poked fun at one of their friends and unintentionally caused him to give up music .The matter was settled with the guilty group apologizing to the person.Tabish stated an example of positive manipulation of opinion in which when he was in 8th standard he couldnot perform well and his confidence was completely shattered .His mother helped him out of this depressing condition and boosted his morale with the result that TABISH was finally able to overcome this hurdle.

SNEHASHISH said that when we become gullible , we start following what others say in order to please them like sleeping late nights so that one can identify himself as belonging to his group .Sir stated an inspiring example of a college friend of his who stuck to his schedule and enjoyed the college life as well to the fullest.

3.FAILURES:
SHRIYYA said that failure can break one's belief over his abilities but if one learn's from his mistakes they can become stepping stones in our life.

GENERAL SOLUTIONS:

• SIR emphasised the need of practicing hard for the task that we feel that we might not feel confident about while performing it.
• Kaushik suggested not caring about the result at all.
• Devbrat suggested focusing on doing our best rather than preparing for it rather than being afraid of the outcome.
• Sir finally added that" THE BEST METHOD IS TO BELIEVE ON YOURSELF AND YOUR ABILITIES".
  

Time Management

In this class, we discussed various issues such as,

1. Is there a need for time management? What are the problems that arose if the time was not managed properly.
2. Various solutions for managing our time properly
   

The problems that necessitated time management seemed to be two,

1. Quality of a task is affected. We time is not managed properly, we start a task just before the deadline, and hence, spend much less time than it deserved. Because of this, the quality of the task is affected in the end.
2. Discomfort to us. If we didn't manage the time, we would have to hurry up/rush/slog to do some of the tasks, which cause extremely discomfort to us. Managing our time might help us finish our tasks in a more relaxed manner and without any tension.

Everyone then talked about how they managed their time, and how time should be managed. Not surprisingly, everyone started their discourse by saying 'Time management is important but ... extremely difficult to implement'. Also, everyone opined that time management was more difficult in college than while preparing for IIT-JEE because here you have lots of items on your plate, which included playing, cultural activities, hobbies etc. Everyone then thought about it a bit, and then wrote down a strategy of time management which was workable (i.e., practical) as well productive in their life here in IIIT.

The various rough strategies of time management proposed by the group were,

1. Srinivasan: Do the assignments in parts. Allocate some time everyday for assignments in order to finish them over a period of time than rushing.
2. Tabish: On the days when classes are not there, allocate the class timings for study. This would enable that the subjects are covered regularly and one doesn't have to rush during the exams.
3. Karan: Have an 8-to-8 schedule in college, which includes all the activities in college such as classes, assignments, sports etc. 9-to-12/2 could be a more private time which can be spent in the room with friends, and also revising the previous topics for a one/two hours.
   
4. Reading before the class helps in grasping things in the class better, and thus, improves our efficiency.
   
5. Shriya: Make an approximate time distribution for our daily activities. The actual time table or plan for the day can be prepared at the beginning of the day itself.
6. ...

Based on the discussions, the students would be preparing a revised time management strategy for themselves after mid-sem1, which would be strictly followed during the week after mid-sem. The strategies and impact will be discussed after that.

Do we need to be pushed ?

In this class, we very discussed briefly on this topic of whether we need to be pushed. For this, we examined the scenarios when we didn't have to be pushed, and we did them voluntarily. It consisted of those tasks which we liked to do, such as hobbies. So, it is primarily the work related tasks such as studies for which we needed to be pushed. Someone pointed the example of high school, where there so many different subjects to study, and all of them were not interesting. One had to study them, just because one had to, and there was no other way. Here, we discussed a little bit about why we had so many subjects. It was pointed out by someone that they were there because we were supposed to get a breadth of everything, which was essential. Then the problem also seemed to lie in the way some of these subjects were taught. Some of the teachers failed to convey them in an interesting way, because of which we felt forced to read them. And, because we are forced, some of us hardly remembers all that was taught in those subjects.

Here, we briefly talked about whether there were scenario's where we didn't have to pushed to follow the rules. Kaushik pointed out that we didn't have problem following rules if they were convenient to us. We took the example of traffic rules, which were meant for our convenience but still people broke them. It appeared that a 'majority' of the rules were in fact, meant for our convenience. Then, the conclusion, was that the problem seemed to be that most of the people didn't understand the purpose of these rules, and that they were really meant for their benefit. We discussed a little more on this topic, with examples of some rules such as, 85% attendance etc. Towards the discussion, Avinash proposed an interesting point, that rules were not needed if everyone conducted themselves responsibly. Ideal situation but probably possible in some scenarios. Regulations were however, necessary to give necessary guidelines.

Debate on Competition OR No-Competition

In our last class, we decided to hold a debate on whether 'competition is necessary' or whether 'no-competition is a preferred environment'. The students divided themselves into two groups. The two teams were,

Team1 arguing for, "Competition is Necessary and Good"

• Pulkit
• Shriya
• Avinash
• Srinivasan
• Trinath
• Snehashish
  

Team2 arguing for, "No-competition is preferred"

• Kaushik
• Devbrat
• Karan
• Tabish
• Prateek

The debate was intense. The main arguments in favor of 'competition' by Team1 (and moderators) were,

• Pulkit, Trinath: It brings the best in us. This is because we do our best in order to become the best.
  
• Snehashish: It helps in self-motivation. It pushes our inner-self to work hard.
  
• Srinivasan, Avinash: The competition forces us to study hard, and get good marks. In the process, we end up acquiring all the knowledge that we might not have if the competition was non-existent. For example, studying for competitive exam like IIT-JEE is what made us strong in various subjects.
  
• Shriya: Without competition, we would be complacent. For example, when the Indian industry did not have any competition (pre-globalization era), it used to produce sub-standard goods and used to take consumers for granted. But, after it is open, it is forced to raise its standards and deliver better goods to the consumers at a lower price.

The main arguments opposed to the idea of 'competition' by Team2 (and moderators) were,

• Devbrat: In reply to Pulkit and Trinath's argument, Devbrat argued that competition doesn't necessarily bring the best. For example, when we see the toppers in academics, they may not necessarily be the best in the field, and it doesn't completely indicate their knowledge and skills. Also, one might become the best, but in a narrow area and it might also happen for a task not of his choice. He might have competed just for the sake of being better than the rest in something.
• Kaushik: He argued that humans were not horses to be pushed. This lead to a greater debate on whether humans need to be pushed by external factors like 'competition' or can we pushed by ourselves. We discussed more on this in the next class.
• Karan, Tabish: They opposed the point that we become knowledgeable because of competition. The things that we learn are short-term only allowing us to well against competition. After the competition/exam, we forget many of the topics because we didn't use proper strategy to learn because of the pressure of competition.
  
• Prateek: -- Raises ill-feelings. The example that he gave was of two friends who prepared together for an IIT-JEE exam together. One got through, whereas the other wasn't. This created a feeling of discomfort between the two friends. This is a classic example of a case where competition causes one to compare themselves with others, and see who is better, thereby resulting in animosity. Another kind of an ill-feeling because of competition is when someone loses in a competition. That person might have a sense of disappointment and failure because he was not as good at a task when compared to others.
  

Conclusion (from the debate) : Competition and Competing indeed was necessary because it helped us do better. However, one needed to avoid the ill-effects of competition. That is, one needed to resort only to 'healthy competition' and not competing 'blindly'. As one of the debaters pointed out, an even better scenario was to not compete with others, but compete with ourselves. 'Striving for excellence' are the words. That way, we are trying to improve ourselves without comparing ourselves with others. Also, it avoided any disappointments, because we know that we have given our best !

Goals in Life

We discussed about our goals in life, the factors that govern the goals, and how to set our goals.

First, everyone mentioned their goals in life. The following were the various goals of our group

1. Contribution to technology - through research - programming
   
2. Contribution to society by being an Civil servant or by other means
3. Better CGPA
4. Computer scientist
5. Financially stable
6. No goal as such - live every day
   

We then discussed the various goals floating in the group. We discussed if each of these could possibly be considered as 'goals of our life'. The goals such as 'contribution to technology' and 'contribution to society' seemed good and sustainable goals because they were either based on interests or because of our inner motivation to do good to the society. We then discussed a bit about whether 'better CGPA' be considered as our primary goal.

We checked why we desired for 'better CGPA'. 'Better CGPA' was needed in order to achieve a 'better job' and 'better job' was needed to achieve a good 'status' in the society. We then examined what happened after we achieved the 'status' that we desired for. The unanimous opinion of the group was after we achieved 'status', we would then aim for 'status+1'. After 'status+1' was achieved, 'status+2' will be the goal. This process is never ending. In this scenario, two things were happening

1. Our goal in life becomes ever elusive
2. This goal would take primary priority in life and we might not enjoy other things that we can do.
   

The goal being elusive became even more clear when we back-traced our life till this moment. We were told in 10th class that 10th class exam was the ultimate thing, and our life will be comfortable after that. Then, 12th exam and competitive exams became ultimate, and we were told that life after that would be comfortable. Now, the ultimate thing is to get a 'better CGPA'.

We then discussed some solutions.
One possible way we could frame our 'goals of life' is to choose such goals which are not abrupt endings, because in such case, we don't have to find ourselves new goals after achieving one. Also, the goals could be such that they are based on our talents and interests. Also, one might choose extremely 'broad goals' where they act merely as 'guidelines' rather than 'something to be achieved or acquired'. The 'broad goals' might also enable us not to have any narrow objective as our goal, thereby enjoying other things in life too.

Then, we examined whether being a 'computer scientist' would qualify as a good goal. The reason why 'computer scientist' was set as a goal was because it is considered very highly to be a computer scientist. We then examined whether our goals are set by us only, or sometimes they are set by our society too. We then saw that we sometimes fix something as our goal because society gives more importance to it, and not because we really want to pursue that goal. Certain jobs are respected by the society, and they naturally become the goals of most people in the society. We considered an example of some courses such as humanities and basic sciences in our country. These streams are not considered the best areas to pursue in our country, not because of our interests, but because these streams are perceived to provide us not too many opportunities. So, the best in our country opt only for engineering or for medicine. This might be a reason why sometimes our parents insist that we pursue a particular area, and not something else that we might insist on. We didn't have a solution for this in our discussion, but we just felt the need to be conscious of this fact.

We dispersed at this point. In the next class, we examined if we had any confusions in our mind because of our discussions in the last class. No body had any confusions. Everyone in the group reexamined their goals based on our discussions in the last class. It was great to find that most of us had goals that were based on our interests and talents, and were sustainable. At this point, one of us raised the point that some of us have 'financial well-being' as our goal because we need to reach a point where we can help our society. This was an extremely valid point. However, it was pointed out that we can help our society at any time in any capacity, and that, it might not be necessary for us to reach a particular point. If we really want to, we have something or the other to give to our society irrespective of our position.

One of the points that we might have missed during the discussion was that do we really need to have goals. One of the us had mentioned his goal as 'no goal - live every day'. There was no discussion on it in the group, but my personal opinion is that having goals might be necessary to provide us a general guidelines based on which we make our decisions, or set our priorities. Without a general goal in life, we might end up pursuing or doing some things that we really didn't intend to do. Of course, this is my personal opinion, and was not discussed on the floor. Others can comment on this ...

That was the summary of our discussion on 'goals in life'.