quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Intuition only goes so far.

In regards to what?

quote:

Originally posted by tubularbills haha, anyone who got suckered into an honors program makes me LOL. you got the same piece of paper all of us "normies" got. its just like the service academies comapred to ROTC...why the hell would you go through that shit for 4 years when you pin on the exact same rank as us. LOL.

its so we dont have to end up as a grunt in the military.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated In regards to what?

Management.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated I think that's very condescending of you. Though I like hard science, I've always been better at social sciences. I did physics, chemistry and maths in my final year of school and passed all of them at around 70%, but my forte has always been English, History, etc. I'm sick of hearing hard scientists say they are smarter than people doing humanities. The one thing you all forget is that in maths or physics, there is always a "right" or a "wrong" answer; once you've worked it out, you either get it or you don't. In social sciences and whatnot, this same attribute does not apply, and that makes things hard too. To say that a physics student is "more intelligent" than someone studying women's studies is erroneous, because you're obviously judging intelligence by your own biased standards. A physics student might be able to work out the mass of a planet, but placed on the street they'd probably struggle to read a bus timetable because it doesn't conform to the hard rules they've bent their lives to, or they might struggle to write grammatically correct sentences or spell properly. On the other hand, someone doing women's studies might struggle to work out how much change they should receive after buying dinner, but plonk them in the middle of a foreign country and they'd be able to find their way home with superior interaction and problem solving skills. It's all relative. A perfect example with which I have personal experience is architects. Architects are smart, right? They build stuff and use complex geometry and engineering. Find me an architect who can spell and I'll find you a women's studies student who is smarter than a physicist. Lastly, I think a lot of people fail to make the distinction between being truly intelligent and simply having a good memory for facts and rote learning. In line with what mezzir said, many of the rote learners achieve good marks but are not genuinely clever.

Sorry but it isn't true. IMO if you can't master something as basic as calculus and freshman physics/chem then you don't deserve any degree.

___________________
I've never been able to eat a whole baby.
Kill the women. Eat the children.
It's just one of those days where you want to bend over everyone you know and kiss their ass goodbye with a big sideways boot.

Latest Mix

quote:

Originally posted by Zild Sorry but it isn't true. IMO if you can't master something as basic as calculus and freshman physics/chem then you don't deserve any degree.

Ha!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Management.

I disagree.

To be a successful manager you have to have a sound knowledge of the field you're managing in, whether it be accounting or computing. These fields can be taught, but the act of management itself is an intrinsic quality like leadership or charisma that can't be taught through conventional means. Sitting in class while some professor who's never had any real world experience or worked in a proper job says "to be a good manager, you must be understanding towards those you work with" isn't going to imbue that quality in you or actually improve your skills.

My Dad always said: "those who can, do, and those who can't, teach".

That's another big problem I have with university; half the teachers are great academics and incredibly intelligent, but they've never learned how to apply their skills to the real world because they've spent their entire lives in institutions. How can you learn marketing or accounting from someone who's never had a job in those fields?

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated I disagree. To be a successful manager you have to have a sound knowledge of the field you're managing in, whether it be accounting or computing. These fields can be taught, but the act of management itself is an intrinsic quality like leadership or charisma that can't be taught through conventional means. Sitting in class while some professor who's never had any real world experience or worked in a proper job says "to be a good manager, you must be understanding towards those you work with" isn't going to imbue that quality in you or actually improve your skills. My Dad always said: "those who can, do, and those who can't, teach". That's another big problem I have with university; half the teachers are great academics and incredibly intelligent, but they've never learned how to apply their skills to the real world because they've spent their entire lives in institutions. How can you learn marketing or accounting from someone who's never had a job in those fields?

Those who can't... teach.

___________________
I've never been able to eat a whole baby.
Kill the women. Eat the children.
It's just one of those days where you want to bend over everyone you know and kiss their ass goodbye with a big sideways boot.

Latest Mix

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated No, curved grading is ridiculous in small classes. The whole idea of curved grading is that the students determine the standards they must aspire to, rather than having the standards set for them. This is both positive and negative, because: a) It's a fairly accurate way of gauging a person's real skills in comparison to others, and therefore in the real world. b) If everyone included in the curve is stupid, or performs poorly, even the poorly skilled people will get marked well. For this to succeed, the sample needs to be large, i.e 1000 people. It works in these cases. I get marked on bell curves at the moment and it's complete and utter bullshit in a class of 25 people. You should be marked on your own merits and whether your work is of good standard, not whether someone's is better than yours.

FUCK BELL CURVE.

I had this stupid elective I picked in my senior year in high school, and we basically had to read random books of our choice of different genres. the entire grade was based on a bell curve-derived from the person in the class with the highest amount read, and the teacher allocated a certain amount of spots for each letter(not usually d's or f's unless they were significantly behind)

So when we found these rules out, my buddy and i tried to start a revolution and convince everyone to read the same amount (6 books only for the semester). there was 11 people in our class so we thought we could pull it off. so we thought.

It seemed everyone was onboard, and we were really stoked that we could pull off our lazy scheme. Many beleived in the revolution, and had faith that our small class would unite. 2 snakes on the plane. we were lied to, and screwed over. most people out of paranoia read 2-3 more(i acccounted for this initially). 2 uppity bitches read over 20 books(250 + pages).

We were betrayed, but we had also let everyone else down in the class that followed our scheme. those girls couldn't look us in the eye afterwards. I found out because I copped the teachers gradebook after my paranoia started kicking in right before the end of that semester and learnt of the treachery that had been taking place.

it worked out that those two girls got high 90's, and the rest of us were between the range of 77-84, so the plan wasn't a complete bust i guess. I learnt alot obout life from that event, the capitalist will always take that incentive and cheat(freakanomix).It was an experiment I feel that shows the weaknesses in a bell curve system especially for a small class size

ps-you cant really cheat in this class the woman would scrutinize the shit out of the book and ask you random shit.

Undergrad:
*BS in Biology
*Minor in Italian
Grad:
*MS in Anatomy
*MD (halfway through, top 10% of class)

quote:

Originally posted by Zild Sorry but it isn't true. IMO if you can't master something as basic as calculus and freshman physics/chem then you don't deserve any degree.

What use do chemistry and calculus have in a person's daily life?

I would argue that the skills taught in humanitarian subjects are more valuable for living, and therefore more valuable as "intelligence".

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated What use do chemistry and calculus have in a person's daily life? I would argue that the skills taught in humanitarian subjects are more valuable for living, and therefore more valuable as "intelligence".

Probably proves you actually learned something and can problem solve instead of bullshit your way through a degree.

___________________
I've never been able to eat a whole baby.
Kill the women. Eat the children.
It's just one of those days where you want to bend over everyone you know and kiss their ass goodbye with a big sideways boot.

Latest Mix