1) What was the biggest surprise for you in the reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the most as different from your expectations?
It wasn't so much as a big surprise, but it was definitely that hooked me to the article: the intro. From the title I wasn't sure what to expect, but reading about the personal experience of someone with so many negative forces against them, and being able to still continue is amazing. I admire that Akula's firm fights against all odds to improve the world of microfinancing for the less fortunate, even if it means they may not be on the winning end. I did not expect the article to be this interesting based on the title.
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
No part was necessarily confusing, per se. If I had to choose something it would have to be the concept of microfinancing as a whole. I know the gist of its definition, but I don't necessarily know how it works. While the author was talking about how he was working in microfinancing, he talked about how there had to be a better way to scale up microfinance in India to better help the poor population. I got what he was trying to say, but I wish I understood more of the logistical parts.
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
You've done tremendous work in India, do you plan on expanding to other poor countries to improve conditions there in terms of microfinancing? Why or why not? If you could go back in time, is there anything you would do differently in terms of your own business?
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
You've done tremendous work in India, do you plan on expanding to other poor countries to improve conditions there in terms of microfinancing? Why or why not? If you could go back in time, is there anything you would do differently in terms of your own business?
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
This is my final time saying this....no I do not think the author was wrong about anything in particular; my reasoning behind this (for the 100th time) is that I can't really argue on a subject matter I am not proficient in and/or an expert in.
No comments:
Post a Comment