I'm a Vietnamese-American student. At Niagara University, I pursued my Bachelor Degree on Business Administration with the concentration in Accounting, then for my Master's Degree in Science of Finance. Therefore, I also expect to seek out the mentorship and education in this endeavor with the focus on aspects of business and corporate communication, including the writing skills.

From my academic experience, the common situation, which is considered to be more challenging is to write a statement of purpose, or in this case, the statement of description about myself in reply to an interview question format. This is mostly due to the struggle of people to describe, in concrete term, of what they are interested or their hobbies, as well as to depict their strengths and interests. It would not be an easy subject for me in terms of its natural deliberation in less than one page to introduce myself. I have always had a diverse cluster of interest for working in a literature job, disregarding my background of Accounting, Business, and Law as my minor during college. With my academic background, I am currently working as an auditor for an audit and consulting firm. I am still planning to pursue my law degree in a new future.

In my free time, I enjoy traveling around. Since I was younger, the architectures world have always been fascinated me. I love to witness with my own eyes the tremendous and fantastic human creation of architectures around the world with their unique cultures and histories. My respects for ancient and modern human creations lay on the fact of its stories to tell us of how people before our times lived their lives, interacted and communicated with each other, evolved through time. My other passion of life is swimming and enjoying the smell of the ocean. I would not express it as my interest but more as my passion in life. I do not just enjoy the ocean, but I literally can say that I am in love with the ocean. The passion has served and guided me through all of my childhood, and then my adult life to enjoy myself.

I have always been in love with literature since I was a little girl. This has given me the ability to read and write, which is something that is the Accounting and Business major lacking. Though, I do enjoy my work as an Auditor, I really think I can pursue my career in either areas. I consistently innovates to create values and goals to meet in work and life. And I can adapt quickly to environment. In addition, I consider myself very self-disciplined and independent. Therefore, I decide to spend my free time to turn my interest of reading and writing in my second career. It would be a great deal of experience to involve in various writing topics.

In addition, working as a freelancer would enable me to maintain the balance with my working life as an auditor. I really expect the opportunity for the life of pursuing not just a new career but also a passion of mine. believe to be a perfect fit for an academic paper company with my accounting and statistical skills with Excel and SPSS, along with my possession to access various academic websites including ProQuest, EBSCOhost, JSTOR, IBISWorld, Sage Online, etc. I strongly believe that one of the most significant factors for academic success comes directly from the personal interest, enthusiasm and discipline to be in the field. That is the main reason why I think I can be an excellent research writer.

As modern libraries fight to remain relevant in the midst of budget cuts, insufficient funding, and society's gradual move towards more dependence on Internet resources, challenges to materials deemed "objectionable" by library patrons continue to be a hot-button issue. While some patrons forgo the usual debate in favor of a felt-tip marker and their own questionable judgment, librarians continue to straddle the line between censorship and selection while attempting to please all. In the modern library system, the rights of the patron have become a question of responsibility and an ethical dilemma for librarians who desire to uphold the principles of intellectual freedom while addressing challenges and community pressures.

Introduction

Recently, I checked out a book from my local library in Lucedale, Mississippi: a comedic crime novel entitled Agnes and the Hitman, by Jennifer Crusie and Bob Mayer. Having read books by both Crusie and Mayer in the past, I expected some semblance of crude language, particularly from Mayer, a former Green Beret whose work admittedly does not shy away from invective. What I did not expect, however, was to discover that someone had gone through the entire novel and censored some of this language. For every occurrence of the expletive "goddamn," the word "damn" had been crossed out with a heavy black marker. Interestingly, the censor's opposition only applied to this particular curse; the words "f*ck" and "s*it" were left whole and intact, even within the same paragraph on certain pages.

When I spoke with the library's branch manager, Rebecca Wheeler, about this issue, she informed me that, much to her annoyance, the library discovers patron-censored books in their collection two to three times per month. However, discovering the culprit in these cases has been nearly impossible, according to Wheeler: "Unfortunately, we do not keep circulation records, so it's hard for us to figure out who has been doing this" (R. Wheeler, personal communication). Still, despite the fact that their actions would be considered the destruction of public property, even if the person responsible is identified, the most that would happen would be to enact a ban from all seven libraries within the system. The culprit's censorship, in the meantime, will have succeeded: the defaced books will remain in the library's collection because replacing every disfigured book is simply too cost inhibitive to consider.

Instances of patron-censored books in this country are not what one would label "widespread," but such cases exist nonetheless. In October 2009, the Maury County Public Library in Columbia, Tennessee, reported that an unknown patron has been crossing out offensive language in some of the books in their fiction section. Library director Elizabeth Potts decries such censorship as a violation of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech, stating that the "self-made censor is binding the mouth of an author" by essentially copy-editing an already copyrighted text ("Censorship Mystery," 2009). And these types of self-assigned censors are not limited to the southern region of the United States; in March 2010, a woman blogged that her mother, a regular patron at a library in California, has recently found more than half a dozen patron-censored books at her local branch. As she reports, these books were censored similarly to my copy of Agnes and the Hitman: "The words that are crossed out aren't the words normally considered filthy ... they are words that someone obviously considers blasphemes ... like goddammit and Jesus Christ" ("Censorship at a Public Library," 2010).

Is patron censorship of materials becoming a trend in libraries today, or has it always been a below-the-radar issue? Have some patrons, unhappy with a particular library's choice of including books with offensive or off-color language, moved beyond protests and debate and simply taken the matter of censorship into their own hands? And, in doing so, have these purported upholders of morality and social order overstepped their bounds by infringing upon the rights of other patrons and impeding the efforts of librarians to do their jobs to the best of their respective abilities?

There is no easy answer to the latter question. Yet even a cursory examination of the history of the selection versus censorship debate-what some would label the cornerstone of the study of library science and information management-leads me to believe that hand-censoring selected texts by purging them of words deemed inappropriate by a cadre of disapproving readers is most decidedly not the solution. Not only is such censorship an illegal offense (the destruction of library property), but it is a reprehensible affront to intellectual freedom, the basis of an open library system.

For the purposes of this paper, I will address censorship issues in printed works, as the discussion on attempts to monitor and limit access to Internet materials is its own intrinsically complex issue. In doing so, I hope to answer the question that has plagued me since discovering Lucedale's own personal library censor: in a technological and budget-conscious era that has seen their gradual decline, what is the modern library patron's role in helping libraries remain relevant in today's society?

Selection versus Censorship: And Never the Twain Shall Meet

For decades, librarians and library professionals have walked the often fine line between honoring the Code of Ethics of the ALA, or American Library Association (2008), which guarantees that librarians will "uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources," and respecting the desires of library patrons who feel that they, or their children, should not be exposed to certain materials. The duty of enabling intellectual freedom-defined by the ALA (2010) as "the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction ... [and] free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause or movement may be explored"-is considered by most librarians to be a sacred one. Still, some library professionals find themselves regularly flirting with the issue of censorship as it relates to one of the most important jobs of the librarian: selection.

The roots of the argument over selection versus censorship can be traced to Lester Asheim's seminal 1953 article "Not Censorship but Selection," in which the author, a former professor and library graduate school dean, formally outlines the difference between the two actions. Asheim (1953) namely defines selection as a necessary evil put into place due to "physical impossibility;" that is, that "no library in the world is large enough to house even one copy of every printed publication." As Asheim (1953) further explains, the innate difference between the process of selection and the act of censorship comes down to a value judgment; essentially, while the selector looks at acquisitions from a "positive" (inclusionary) approach, the censor's viewpoint is an inherently "negative" (exclusionary) one:

"For to the selector, the important thing is to find reasons to keep the book. Given such a guiding principle, the selector looks for values, for strengths, for virtues which will over shadow minor objections. For the censor, on the other hand, the important thing is to find reasons to reject the book; his guiding principle leads him to seek out the objectionable features, the weaknesses, the possibilities for misinterpretation. And since there is seldom a flawless work in any form, the censor's approach can destroy much that is worth saving." (Negative or Positive? section, para. 1)

However, in an examination of Asheim's argument, Tony Doyle questions this type of black-and-white approach to such a complex issue, claiming that "Asheim's distinction between selection and censorship is so vague as to be dubious in theory and useless in practice" (p. 18). Doyle claims that Asheim, who revised his own thesis in 1983 to focus more on the actual mechanics of an unbiased process of selection, promotes an "ideal of an unbiased collection ... with unlimited access" (p. 19) that is inaccessible in modern libraries, particularly in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, as some critics advocate a "relaxation of First Amendment protections" in the name of protecting the country. Similarly, John B. Harer also sees this kind of knee-jerk justification of censorship in the recent calls for a "Parental Empowerment Act"-designed to give parents a voice in the material selection process in school libraries by instituting a form of parental advisory boards over those libraries-as "interfer[ing] with the professional responsibilities of the school library media specialist ... quite possibly strip[ping] them of their professional judgment in selection" (p. 18).

Is Asheim's ideal really all that inaccessible? Perhaps the answer to that question depends on librarians themselves. Most purport to follow the ALA's Library Bill of Rights, first adopted in 1939 and reaffirmed most recently in 1996, which declares that libraries and library professionals "should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment." But even though some refuse to admit it, by engaging in at times wily manipulation of their own selection process, librarians are more than capable of self-censoring, or the deliberate exclusion of certain materials, by preventing those materials from making their way into collections for various and sundry reasons.

According to Cora McAndrews Moellendick (2009), these reasons can range from "limited budgets, lack of interest or demand, [and] inadequate shelf space ... [to] lack of relevance to curriculum" (p. 72). But these "reasons" come across to many as mere justifications for censorship, with librarians acting as not the guardians of free access to information, but the barrier preventing easy accessibility. Bonnie Osif (2005) takes this one step further, claiming that such barriers are "dangerous" as they seemingly inhibit a person's reasoning ability:

"If something offends, it might also cause deeper analysis or more research. In our information world, that cannot be seen as a negative action. By denying the right to these ideas, information, or discourse this censorship is harmful ... This is a principle that has been at the core of librarianship. Information should be available. (p. 46)

In essence, the issue of selection versus censorship comes down to one thing: who controls access to information? The power librarians hold in the debate over intellectual freedom is staggering when one actually sits down to think about it. How do librarians, then, avoid using that power in a negative fashion due to personal bias?"

Self-Censorship: the Modern Librarian's Foibles

As previously noted, many librarians find that they must reconcile their own belief systems-religious, moral, societal, political, or otherwise-with the needs of their patrons, ensuring that a personal bias against some subject matter does not hinder their ability to uphold their professional responsibility. As Christine M. Allen proposes, librarians "must all become censors of [them]selves ... [and] be very vigilant with respect to those elusive elements that can predetermine [their] collection decisions without conscious knowledge" (p. 5). Debbie Abilock also promotes that librarians self-examine their beliefs as "a necessary check against narrow-mindedness, ignorance, and bias" (p. 7). In that vein, librarians must recognize that they are not infallible creatures while acknowledging that sometimes, setting aside one's personal beliefs for the sake of intellectual freedom is harder than it may seem.

In a 2008 survey, published the following year in the School Library Journal, library professionals and media specialists from 654 school libraries (on elementary, middle school, and high school levels) across the country were asked a series of questions designed to determine levels of self-censorship in the modern library system. The results of this anonymous survey revealed that 87% of respondents admitted to passing on purchasing a book because of "sexual content;" 61% because of "language;" 51% because of "violence;" and 47% because of "homosexuality." Debra Lau Whelan, who conducted the survey for SLJ, calls such self-censorship-in which librarians deliberately fail to add certain books to their collections because of content or fear of challenges from patrons-the "dirty little secret that no one in the profession wants to talk about or admit practicing" (p. 28).

Self-censorship in the modern library takes many forms, but three of the main ways by which librarians take on the role of censor are labeling, restricting access, and expurgation. As defined by Charlene C. Cain (2006), labeling is the fixing of materials with a "prejudicial designation" designed to discourage patrons from choosing to read that material (p. 7). Similarly, restricting access to particular materials creates the illusion that such materials are too scandalous to be included with the "normal" materials in a collection; this also creates a barrier between the patron and the material, as the librarian becomes the de facto "middle man" running interference between the two. The most insidious of these censoring methods, however, is expurgation, defined by the ALA as "any deletion, excision, alteration, editing or obliteration of any part(s) ... of library resources by the library, its agent, or its parent institution" (as cited in Cain, p. 7-8). In essence, expurgation prevents readers from experiencing the entire book and violates the copyright privileges of the author, whose work cannot be edited in this manner without permission. Expurgation is the method preferred by the previously-mentioned marker-wielding patrons in Mississippi, Tennessee, and California, but according to Cain, librarians themselves have been guilty of similar instances of expurgation "in order to make [materials] more palatable to some library patrons" (p. 7).

Initially, it seems difficult to believe that librarians or library employees would indulge in any of these exercises, but examine the case of Sharon Cook, formerly an employee at the Jessamine County Public Library in Nicholasville, Kentucky. In late 2008, Cook checked out the library's only copy of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Volume IV: The Black Dossier, a graphic novel portraying explicit visual scenes of sex and violence. She continued to check out the book repeatedly for more than nine months until a hold was placed on the material after an eleven-year-old girl requested it. Cook and another employee, Beth Boisvert, then collaborated to remove the hold from the book to prevent the child from checking it out. The following day, both women were fired at the orders of the library board.

Cook and Boisvert have been labeled both heroes and villains by critics. Some claim that their actions are laudable because they acted out of "concern" for the child involved. Others condemn their actions as antithetical to the First Amendment and a violation of civil liberties. But in the wake of the furor over the firings, Boisvert painted their fight in more crusading terms: because the two women live and work in a self-labeled "conservative community," she argued, "we will choose to have our children protected" (Wilson) over ensuring the guarantee of intellectual freedom. Still, the claim of "protecting our children"-a battle-cry for censors if there ever was one-does not, by any definition, justify a deliberate breach of ethical responsibility. Though the two women in question are, admittedly, not librarians (neither Cook nor Boisvert holds an MLS degree), as employees of a library that had openly adopted the ALA Code of Ethics as its own, the responsibility for promoting and securing intellectual freedom became theirs. By deliberately withholding materials from their patrons, these library employees committed a gross violation of their ethical and professional duty and have done a great disservice to the community which they otherwise claim to protect.

Conclusion

When a librarian accepts a position and begins the process of building, rebuilding, or supplementing a collection, they also intrinsically accept the responsibilities outlined by the ALA Code of Ethics, and agree to honor the pursuit of intellectual freedom by guaranteeing free and open access to information in their libraries. When a librarian is tested by a challenged book or an offended patron, it is the librarian's duty not to quail under opposition, but to continue to uphold their ethical responsibility to maintaining accessibility to the materials their library holds.

This ethical responsibility extends, albeit informally, to a library's patrons as well. Though patrons are, obviously, not bound to uphold the tenets of the ALA's Code of Ethics, they are, by virtue of the privilege to borrow from a library's collection, bound to uphold and respect the rights of others to access information and material without impediment. In taking matters into their own hands and expurgating objectionable words or phrases from library materials, patrons are flouting the freedom that comes from the ownership of a library card. If librarians must find a way to set aside personal distaste for the sake of providing relevant, needed materials to a wide variety of patrons, those patrons must, for the sake of the modern library's continued success, respect the right of all readers to obtain the information they need and desire.

Censoring library property is never the solution to concerns about objectionable material. In many ways, it would be akin to walking up to a person on the street and slapping a piece of duct tape on his/her mouth to avoid hearing offensive language. In the end, we are all adults, and as condescending as it sounds to actually put it into words, it is time we all grew up and, while we are at it, remember one of the biggest lessons of childhood: if it does not belong to you, do not damage it. If you, Anonymous Library Patron, find something objectionable in a book, do not cross it out. And if you cannot bring yourself to continue reading a "trashy" or "disgusting" book, simply force yourself to put it down. As the very frustrated Maury County Public Library director Elizabeth Potts says, "Why deface a book? If you don't like what's in it, shut it and bring it back" ("Censorship Mystery," 2009).

References

Abilock, D. (2007). Four questions to ask yourself. Knowledge Quest, 36(2), 7-11.

Allen, C.M. (2008). Are we selecting? Or are we censoring? Young Adult Library Services, 5(3), 5.

American Library Association. (2008). Code of ethics of the American Library Association.

American Library Association. (2010). Intellectual freedom and censorship Q & A.

American Library Association. (1996). Library Bill of Rights.

Cain, C.C. (2006). Librarians and censorship: the ethical imperative. Louisiana Libraries, 68(3), 6-8.

Censorship mystery brewing inside public library. (2009).

Doyle, T. (2002). Selection versus censorship in libraries. Collection Management, 27(1), 15-25.

Harer, J.B. (2009). Parental involvement in selection: mandated or our choice? Library Media Connection, 28(3), 18-19.

Kobysmere. (2010). Censorship at a public library.

Moellendick, C.M. (2009). Libraries, censors, and self-censorship. Pacific Northwest Library Association Quarterly, 73(4), 68-76.

Osif, B. Selection and censorship. Library Administration & Management, 19(1), 42-46.

Wheeler, R. (2010). Branch Manager, Lucedale-George County Public Library System. Telephone interview.

Whelan, D.L. (2009). A dirty little secret. School Library Journal, 55(2), 27-30.

Whelan, D.L. (2009). SLJ self-censorship survey. School Library Journal, 55(2).

Wilson, A. (2009). Child protection or censorship? Lexington Herald-Leader.

The IEP is a crucial tool in developing effective lesson plans for students with special needs. The following three lesson plans were birthed from the IEPs of an ESL learner, an autistic child, and a student with ADHD. The goals of the IEP were utilized as a basis for the entire lesson, including objectives, steps, and assessment.

Lesson Plan I: Social Skill Development through Science-Rooted, Creative Expression

Age: 6- 9 Time: 45 minutes

Objectives: Student will cultivate social communication in both a group environment as well as via class presentation using an science-rooted, artistic project as a basis for creative expression.

STEPS:

- Go over the main characteristics of planets in the solar system, paying particular attention to weather, skyline, and topographical features.

- Students will be grouped into threes, assigned a planet, and charged to design their own house for their planet using art materials. Each member of the group is assigned a particular feature (roof, doors and windows, foundation, etc.), but all group members need to work together.

- Students will present their outer-space home to the class with each member speaking about their part in the structure.

Assessment: Did all students communicate effectively and consistently? Did the autistic child succeed in interacting with his/her group? Did all students grasp the differences between the Earth environment and their own planet's environment?

Materials: Construction paper, cardboard, glue, markers, glitter, play-doh.

Brief Rationale: The IEP goals for the second-grade student with mild autism revealed that he struggles with social communication and needs to work on interrupting, taking turns, and speaking in front of others; this plan addresses all of those goals through a structured, group environment.

Lesson Plan II: Vocabulary Learning through Physical Expression

Age: 8-10 Time: 45 minutes

Objectives: Using Island of the Blue Dolphins as a foundation, students will infer the meaning of words and then act out salient vocabulary words physically.

STEPS:

- Writing the vocabulary words for Chapters I and II of the text on the board, the teacher will charge students to infer the meaning of these words and write it in their journals (pelt, crevice, vow, wreckage, clamor, reef).

- In groups of three, each student will find the meanings of two words, so that an entire group finds the meaning of all six words, using internet searches and reference books.

- Silently, students will then act out the meaning of their two words for the rest of their group before all group members write down the full meaning of each term.

- As an extension and if time allows, students from all groups can act out their word for the class. For instance, the students who had the word "wreckage" could all demonstrate for the class how they acted it out for their group.

Assessment: Did all students effectively link their physical actions with new vocabulary? Do all students fully grasp the new terms?

Materials: One or more computers with internet access, four to seven dictionaries, one set of encyclopedias.

Brief Rationale: The IEP that inspired this lesson was for a third-grade, ESL learner who struggles with vocabulary learning. Because substantial research suggests that physical movement supports vocabulary retention, this lesson utilized group communication and physical expression to enhance learning.

Lesson Plan III: Increasing Attentiveness through Character Development Tracking in Film

Age: 13- 15 Time: 2.5 hours (several class periods)

Objectives: Students will track the development of a character in the film Far and Away, paying particular attention to how events mold the character

STEPS:

- The film will be introduced by discussing immigration and Westward expansion in the nineteenth century

- Students will work in pairs and be assigned one main character from the film (Joseph Donnelly, Shannon Christie, Stephen Chase, Daniel Christie, and Nora Christie)

- Students will watch the film using a tracking sheet and record events that directly impact their character, citing how those events change them in some way (Ex. Joseph Donnelly becomes obsessed with land ownership when his father dies)

- At film's end, the groups will create a timeline for their character's development and present it to the class

Assessment: Did students remain attentive throughout the film? Do they successfully grasp how events evolve characters within a film? Do they understand how immigrants were affected by Westward expansion in the United States during the 1800s?

Materials: Tracking sheets and writing utensils for each group, the film Far and Away (1992), poster-board and art materials for timeline creation.

Brief Rationale: The IEP used as the basis for this lesson belonged to an eighth-grade boy with moderate ADHD. His goals largely surrounded maintaining an attentive state with regard to texts (written or cinematic). Keeping him engaged in a film by charging him to consistently track character development holds his focus; this is supported by his working with a partner that can keep him on track should his attention begin to wander.

Summation

In general, IEPs provide a firm foundation for lesson planning. By integrating IEP goals into lessons, teachers can ensure that students achieve their full potential in each and every subject area. Using group work fortifies social interaction between the general, student population and the students with special needs.

Example Statement of Purpose (written by a NYU student)

(repaid - you may post in 2020 in public)

--------- FINAL VERSION ---------

My dad loves to recount the tales of him growing up in Colorado, where the snowy landscapes and foggy winters were solely for the brave. "The steeper the slope, the sweeter the adrenaline rush feels skiing downhill," he loved to explain to me. I couldn't relate to the snow stories much, having grown up in Tampa, Florida, but we could both attest that the biggest difference between my dad's childhood and mine was the radical evolution of the digital world, and particularly how data and technology changed the world of crime. Luckily for me, my adrenaline rush comes when surfing the waves of the internet.

For that reason, I am passionate about garnering a set of skills that will empower me to operate within the cybersecurity industry to find pragmatic solutions that secure the World Wide Web for everyday users. At no other point in time has data become the most valuable asset that we have, so as I pursue my preferential career in cybersecurity, I believe that my path begins by finding a competent school with a wholesome program that equips me with both the necessary basic and advanced skills.

Upon clearing high school, my initial aspirations were to be a gaming developer, primarily to come up with ethical solutions to regulate that market with educational programs. However, I soon realized that there was a bigger fight than that, as thousands of people and companies risked to have their systems hacked, their businesses stopped and their privacy invaded when going online every day. I felt a bigger purpose in using my knowledge and skills to arm people with knowledge protection, and volunteered for a 3 month training of high school students in my local area on social media protection against bullying and invasion of privacy.

That short stint certainly solidified my interest in cybersecurity and my goals to expand further in the field, but I felt that a large part of winning the war would be by understanding the humanity aspect of it. And so for a start, I successfully completed a degree in Psychology at Florida State University. I can now confidently assert that I am at a more enlightened place mentally to dive into the cybersecurity industry, and for that reason, I wish to express my intention to join your Bridge program at NYU Tandon. NYU, being an accredited knowledge powerhouse, would be the significant jumpstart in the highly competitive market of cybersecurity, and I believe my dedication, my keen eye to detail and my nature to innovate will be well nurtured and elevated within this course. Seeing as I am lacking in the science or engineering department, I am particularly ecstatic about the introductory units such as algorithm analysis and OS concepts, as well as the intensive nature of the course within its relatively short time frame. I truly hope to be considered for this key course and look forward to an acceptance from you.

--------- ROUGH DRAFT BELOW ---------

The reason I'm applying for the NYU Tandon bridge program is because it offers me a chance to apply for the NYU master's program even though i don't have a background in computer science. What this really offers me is a second chance in life where I can change my career to something I'm passionate about. Before stumbling upon this program I thought it was already too late for me to change my career or to even pursue a degree in cyber security. There are shortcomings that I need to address in this statement. One being that I had a low GPA in college and I need to address that. The reason why I have a low GPA is because of my financial instability in college. While in college my father lost his job and so i had to take on 2 jobs to support the family. Also at the same time my cousin developed cancer and he had no insurance so a good portion of my pay went to his medical bills also and without a doubt his illness took an emotional toll on me as well. It was hard working 2 jobs and attending school full time and as a result my grades suffered.

I have no background in computer science. I graduated college in 2008 with a degree in biology. For the past 8 years I have been working as a medical assistant in a non profit community health center. I love to learn and pride myself on the ability to roll up my sleeves and figure things out on my own. It has long been my creed that my work rate is second to none and what I lack in experience I will overcome with strong work ethics In these past 8 years I have seen two promotions and I received the employee of the year award in 2014 in a health center with over 1000 employees.

On top of the full time job at the health center I also work part time as a operations manager at Front line security. This a business that I started with my cousin since 2005.

My awareness of the cyber security program came with the SAMSAM ransomware hackers in 2016, which was devastating to the healthcare field and indirectly affected my field of work. This event revived my interest in computers with a fascination in cybersecurity. I wanted to learn more about the nature of ransomware and while Googling the SAMSAM hackers, I stumbled upon the NYU cybersecurity bridge program. Before this, I didn't know that such a program existed.

This statement needs to address why I want to change careers and how my experiences now makes me suitable for cyber security. More importantly I need to show that I am eager to learn.