|
Russian Federation748 Posts
He won't even get a minimum wage job with his attitude. Kyrillion: how old are you? Have you even spent a minute of your life working? You don't even have the slightest idea of how real life works. Let me give you a hint: ditch your terrible attitude or you'll suffer so badly.
If you compared education level and "grades", you'll notice a trend that the highest earners are the ones with the best grades. The ones on benefits are full of those who dropped out of high school and barely able to construct a grammatical sentence. It doesn't take rocket science (which you're incapable of) to figure this out.
Are you doing it again ?
I shouldn't even answer your questions but if it can make you hold your tongue I will. I'm 18, have always had top-notch grades and ben praised by my teachers, and just finished my second year at University as valedictorian. I intend to become a theoretical physicist (which is a low-wage job, at least you're dead on on that). Anything else you wish to know ?
Resorting to use your real-life status and age (which I'll assume you're not lying about because it does not matter) as an argument is so dumb there really is no need for an answer. All you're able to claim is that "real life" works in a particular way while I was explaining how it ought to work : yes, that's exactly talking beside the point. I don't need to experience a dozen of job interviews (by the way, yes, I have never worked one minute in my life ; I have studied far more than the average though, for I prefer knowledge to money) to understand that people should be judged on their ability to master their field and do their job well rather than wasting their time in mundane tasks (does the word pensum not exist in English ? surprising). Any child would understand that, may I say. If you don't while being over 20, it's time to seek why.
And why did I put "real life" in quotation marks ? Because this real life you're claiming to know you have never experienced. Real life is competition, elitism, and the best status being given to the best. What you advocate is a system where underachieving persons can reap the most benefits because it has precisely being designed to that effect, a system that enables to bypass excellence through mindless obedience. This is deeply artificial or, in other words, couldn't be further from "real life". It's life made easier for you.
You are either too young to have anything worthwhile to contribute
I just wanted to quote that in case some people may have missed that magnificent statement. Thank you deeply, Dekoth, for bringing a bit of fun into this thread.
So.... is there just no such thing as a zero? Does that mark simply not exist? How pathetic.
The zero is too difficult a concept to grasp for school. Just look how many years it took mankind to invent it !
How is who they pick relevant to the performance of the actual employees?
What I call a signal is extremely clear. It's a very defined concept, and it's not new whatsoever. It's even the prime example used on the Wikipedia page, very first paragraph.
How do they rate that performance ? If they do it in the same ways they're used to be evaluated, or if the persons who teach them how to evaluate are also people who teach future teachers, it's obvious people with higher grades will be rated higher again. I'm not familiar with that though, so I won't answer further, but one thing that buggs me in that you seem to imply everyone need to excel in their jobs. Yet most jobs are easy and can be accomplished by everyone more or less equally well. In which case the reviews you talk about are necessary pointless, and it's safe to assume they reflect previous grades blindly. If grades at school do not reflect pupils performance, why should I trust anyone they do in jobs ?
As for the well-defined concept of signal, I've never heard of it. There are tons of new concepts which appear, sometimes useful, most of the time not, I'm not supposed to know them all and neither can you. I'm also not sure whether Wikipedia is a reliable source on economics, but why not. I still think one could easily rephrase that so as to avoid confusion.
If you're telling me that, all else equal, if you were told prospect #1 had straight A's and prospect #2 had straight C's, and they both came from the same school, and you had to pick the hardest worker for a project that had the potential to make or break the company, you wouldn't pick prospect #1? You'd be indifferent between the two?
Because if I were to hire someone for a entry level business position, I don't really give a fuck if they're really good at biology - I care that they made an effort to do what was asked of them to achieve the A in biology. Whether the grade in the class was comprised completely of your midterms and final exams, or if it was composed almost entirely of busy work, you made it happen. And that's what counts in the real world. Making it happen. You either noted that it was composed entirely of exams, figured out what the professor was looking for, and scored high (great skill to have, giving your superior what they're looking for), or you took in a ton of busy mind numbing work (great skill to have, even if you're presented with something not super stimulating, you can still be counted on to do what needs to be done).
I would pick the one with straight A's if I absolutely have no idea what those grade means, but that never happens. If I were responsible, I would inquire as to how those grades are given. Maybe I would find out that students with C's are better than ones with A's, who knows ? If you have to chose the best out of two Russian pupils, one with 2's and one with 4's, whom do you pick ? The best one is the second, because 1 is the worst note and 5 the best in their system, but you need to know that beforehand. Let me ask you in return : let's not melt all grades and have two separate sets. One prospect has straight A's in exams and C's in chores. The other one has the opposite. Whom do you pick ? The one who likes copying books ? It has not escaped my notice tha you overlooked my analogy. I guess that means you consider it a good assignment. It makes me wonder if there's any point in us discussing anything, especially since it seems we're not talking about the same kind of jobs at all. I thought it was obvious the subject was difficult jobs, which require a high level of expertise, because they're the ones interesting to consider, but what you apparently had in mind was simple and boring ones in general, as your second paraph shows. If I were a recruiter for those, I may prefer the one who enjoys mind numbing work, if he really is the more apt. Unless I misunderstood something, we've just been talking past each other because you weren't clear in what you described.
By the way, it's not true that people keen on mundane work are more fit than others to care about boring but mandatory part of a real job. The first ones are motivated only by grades, and if they have no immediate interest in doing something they won't do it with all their heart (the carrot-and-stick approach). But those who hate useless tasks are usually responsible minds that also hate poorly done work, and will strive to ensure that everything necessary will be taken care of, as they're aware of the importance and value of tasks in general. You're claiming that obedience is equivalent to responsability, which is a massive fallacy.
|
Too long to quote, half of it is just pompous statements.
Because you never worked a second, because you claim to have "top notch" grades, you don't know what it's like to be down in the gutter. You're out of touch with the rest of society. If you didn't bother to even hand in a single assignment, do you think you can get to where you are at right now?
You're dismissing the grade system as "mindless obedience". Yet you claim to have "top notch" grades. Does anyone else sense the hypocrisy? Tell you what, go be a politician and revamp the education system to this perfect ideal that you're hypothesizing about, but have not even described it. I bet you'll be a good politician, considering all the empty statements you're making.
I have no idea why the fuck you decided to convert the A's and C's into Russians, with numbers from 1-5. You spent half a paragraph saying absolutely nothing. If you think that getting A's is about copying books because that's what you do, think again. Some subjects require critical thinking, unlike the ones that you've been taking.
I'll treat you as gutter trash until you can actually make a coherent suggestion about how to improve the system.
User was warned for this post
|
The OP was about teacher giving a mark of zero (aka nothing) for any assignment not handed in
The teacher accepted any assignments late - if anybody read the link it says the zero marks were not final. The teacher gave the students an example of what their marks MAY look like IF they did not complete and hand in something for the assignments
Teacher cannot give any marks for something he cannot see - is that somehow unfathomable?
He gives students ample warning and has been doing this for a long time so why does the school suddenly have a problem with it now? Either the school management is utterly inept or a parent with a lot of pull had a whinge because their lazy arse kid couldn't be arsed doing his homework
GG no re
Seriously what is going on in this thread? You want to compare dick lengths take it to pm's
|
On June 06 2012 20:51 Kyrillion wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +On June 06 2012 20:51 Kyrillion wrote:Show nested quote +
He won't even get a minimum wage job with his attitude. Kyrillion: how old are you? Have you even spent a minute of your life working? You don't even have the slightest idea of how real life works. Let me give you a hint: ditch your terrible attitude or you'll suffer so badly.
If you compared education level and "grades", you'll notice a trend that the highest earners are the ones with the best grades. The ones on benefits are full of those who dropped out of high school and barely able to construct a grammatical sentence. It doesn't take rocket science (which you're incapable of) to figure this out.
Are you doing it again ? I shouldn't even answer your questions but if it can make you hold your tongue I will. I'm 18, have always had top-notch grades and ben praised by my teachers, and just finished my second year at University as valedictorian. I intend to become a theoretical physicist (which is a low-wage job, at least you're dead on on that). Anything else you wish to know ? Resorting to use your real-life status and age (which I'll assume you're not lying about because it does not matter) as an argument is so dumb there really is no need for an answer. All you're able to claim is that "real life" works in a particular way while I was explaining how it ought to work : yes, that's exactly talking beside the point. I don't need to experience a dozen of job interviews (by the way, yes, I have never worked one minute in my life ; I have studied far more than the average though, for I prefer knowledge to money) to understand that people should be judged on their ability to master their field and do their job well rather than wasting their time in mundane tasks (does the word pensum not exist in English ? surprising). Any child would understand that, may I say. If you don't while being over 20, it's time to seek why. And why did I put "real life" in quotation marks ? Because this real life you're claiming to know you have never experienced. Real life is competition, elitism, and the best status being given to the best. What you advocate is a system where underachieving persons can reap the most benefits because it has precisely being designed to that effect, a system that enables to bypass excellence through mindless obedience. This is deeply artificial or, in other words, couldn't be further from "real life". It's life made easier for you. I just wanted to quote that in case some people may have missed that magnificent statement. Thank you deeply, Dekoth, for bringing a bit of fun into this thread. Show nested quote +So.... is there just no such thing as a zero? Does that mark simply not exist? How pathetic. The zero is too difficult a concept to grasp for school. Just look how many years it took mankind to invent it ! Show nested quote +How is who they pick relevant to the performance of the actual employees?
What I call a signal is extremely clear. It's a very defined concept, and it's not new whatsoever. It's even the prime example used on the Wikipedia page, very first paragraph. How do they rate that performance ? If they do it in the same ways they're used to be evaluated, or if the persons who teach them how to evaluate are also people who teach future teachers, it's obvious people with higher grades will be rated higher again. I'm not familiar with that though, so I won't answer further, but one thing that buggs me in that you seem to imply everyone need to excel in their jobs. Yet most jobs are easy and can be accomplished by everyone more or less equally well. In which case the reviews you talk about are necessary pointless, and it's safe to assume they reflect previous grades blindly. If grades at school do not reflect pupils performance, why should I trust anyone they do in jobs ? As for the well-defined concept of signal, I've never heard of it. There are tons of new concepts which appear, sometimes useful, most of the time not, I'm not supposed to know them all and neither can you. I'm also not sure whether Wikipedia is a reliable source on economics, but why not. I still think one could easily rephrase that so as to avoid confusion. Show nested quote +
If you're telling me that, all else equal, if you were told prospect #1 had straight A's and prospect #2 had straight C's, and they both came from the same school, and you had to pick the hardest worker for a project that had the potential to make or break the company, you wouldn't pick prospect #1? You'd be indifferent between the two?
Because if I were to hire someone for a entry level business position, I don't really give a fuck if they're really good at biology - I care that they made an effort to do what was asked of them to achieve the A in biology. Whether the grade in the class was comprised completely of your midterms and final exams, or if it was composed almost entirely of busy work, you made it happen. And that's what counts in the real world. Making it happen. You either noted that it was composed entirely of exams, figured out what the professor was looking for, and scored high (great skill to have, giving your superior what they're looking for), or you took in a ton of busy mind numbing work (great skill to have, even if you're presented with something not super stimulating, you can still be counted on to do what needs to be done).
I would pick the one with straight A's if I absolutely have no idea what those grade means, but that never happens. If I were responsible, I would inquire as to how those grades are given. Maybe I would find out that students with C's are better than ones with A's, who knows ? If you have to chose the best out of two Russian pupils, one with 2's and one with 4's, whom do you pick ? The best one is the second, because 1 is the worst note and 5 the best in their system, but you need to know that beforehand. Let me ask you in return : let's not melt all grades and have two separate sets. One prospect has straight A's in exams and C's in chores. The other one has the opposite. Whom do you pick ? The one who likes copying books ? It has not escaped my notice tha you overlooked my analogy. I guess that means you consider it a good assignment. It makes me wonder if there's any point in us discussing anything, especially since it seems we're not talking about the same kind of jobs at all. I thought it was obvious the subject was difficult jobs, which require a high level of expertise, because they're the ones interesting to consider, but what you apparently had in mind was simple and boring ones in general, as your second paraph shows. If I were a recruiter for those, I may prefer the one who enjoys mind numbing work, if he really is the more apt. Unless I misunderstood something, we've just been talking past each other because you weren't clear in what you described. By the way, it's not true that people keen on mundane work are more fit than others to care about boring but mandatory part of a real job. The first ones are motivated only by grades, and if they have no immediate interest in doing something they won't do it with all their heart (the carrot-and-stick approach). But those who hate useless tasks are usually responsible minds that also hate poorly done work, and will strive to ensure that everything necessary will be taken care of, as they're aware of the importance and value of tasks in general. You're claiming that obedience is equivalent to responsability, which is a massive fallacy.
Well I suggest you read more on that Wikipedia page. And I'm not sure if you'r aware, but Wikipedia is considered to be now one of the best sources around, and is far more accurate than any other published encyclopedia in existence, afaik. You wouldn't use it as a source in a scientific/published paper, but beyond that, the validity of the articles shouldn't really be cast into question.
The entire point is that you don't have the other information and it's not possible to inquire about it. You can't find out the A person is a C's in chores. You don't have the information. A huge segment of economics focuses completely on asymmetrical information - how parties react when one side has perfect information, but the other doesn't. Adverse selection, moral hazard, principal/agent problem, you probably touched on them all briefly in high school economics, had you taken it, but they go quite in depth with numerous theories.
In the job market, potential employees seek to sell their services to employers for some wage, or price. Generally, employers are willing to pay higher wages to employ better workers. While the individual may know his or her own level of ability, the hiring firm is not (usually) able to observe such an intangible trait - thus there is an asymmetry of information between the two parties. Education credentials can be used as a signal to the firm, indicating a certain level of ability that the individual may possess; thereby narrowing the informational gap. This is beneficial to both parties as long as the signal indicates a desirable attribute - a signal such as a criminal record may not be so desirable.
You have in your head some system where you can determine the actual harder worker between the A student and C student. The point is you can't, so you use the grades as a signal. And do you know why I consider busy work, in moderation, good assignments? Because doing it represents your ability to do mundane tasks when you're asked to do them. And that's a highly desirable trait by companies, even when you're getting paid in the six figures.
So you need to stop having the mindset that the C worker might in reality be more competent than the A worker because the system is flawed. Sure, it's very possible, but with little other criteria to go off of due to asymmetric information, you have to make judgement given your limited information. And grades, as shown in numerous studies, are a strong indicator as to your future performance as an employee.
Unfortunately you really do come off as a know-it-all eighteen your old. Regardless of your supposed top marks, you have a really hard time not coming off as quite pretentious.
|
On June 06 2012 23:03 Heh_ wrote:
Too long to quote, half of it is just pompous statements.
Because you never worked a second, because you claim to have "top notch" grades, you don't know what it's like to be down in the gutter. You're out of touch with the rest of society. If you didn't bother to even hand in a single assignment, do you think you can get to where you are at right now?
You're dismissing the grade system as "mindless obedience". Yet you claim to have "top notch" grades. Does anyone else sense the hypocrisy? Tell you what, go be a politician and revamp the education system to this perfect ideal that you're hypothesizing about, but have not even described it. I bet you'll be a good politician, considering all the empty statements you're making.
I have no idea why the fuck you decided to convert the A's and C's into Russians, with numbers from 1-5. You spent half a paragraph saying absolutely nothing. If you think that getting A's is about copying books because that's what you do, think again. Some subjects require critical thinking, unlike the ones that you've been taking.
I'll treat you as gutter trash until you can actually make a coherent suggestion about how to improve the system.
Thanks, you beat me too it. This about sums up his post completely. Basically most of his statements are direct contradictions of one another and things that no top student would ever say. Valedictorian? That made me laugh. Sounds like a typical kid who thinks he is smarter than everyone else. Reality is going to be particularly brutal to this one, I should know I walked the exact path he is on.
Another case proving that IQ really isn't a good measure of intelligence.
|
Russian Federation748 Posts
Reading your posts is certainly not going to help me improve in that regard ; especially when you cannot help mentioning a crowd of economical concepts that I reckon could be rephrased quickly for everyone to understand, when they're not void (this wikipedia quote isn't very epiphanic). And may I inform you we don't have the option to take any lessons in economics if we opt for science where I live. I would gladly have attended those. May I also add I'm fairly sure in any civilized country, attacking someone's age is considered equivalent to instantly losing a discussion, especially when they're kind enough to give it away. I also appreciate that you doubt everything I said of myself, while I've so far trusted all your implicit claims. Do you not think I can choose to believe you're thirteen and ask your dad to write half of your posts ? Yet I don't.
Everything else you say I've already answered to.
|
I hated (and still hate) all forms of school. Maybe it was because I was forced to put some kind of effort into the school work, or else I wasnt going to pass and would get held back. I wish i was lucky enough to go to a highschool and passed students no matter what lol, but I got stuck with a strict school.
|
On June 07 2012 06:34 ishyishy wrote:
I hated (and still hate) all forms of school. Maybe it was because I was forced to put some kind of effort into the school work, or else I wasnt going to pass and would get held back. I wish i was lucky enough to go to a highschool and passed students no matter what lol, but I got stuck with a strict school.
You'll feel differently when you get into a decent college. Schools that just "pass everybody no matter what" tend to be looked down upon.
|
On June 07 2012 06:37 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 06:34 ishyishy wrote:
I hated (and still hate) all forms of school. Maybe it was because I was forced to put some kind of effort into the school work, or else I wasnt going to pass and would get held back. I wish i was lucky enough to go to a highschool and passed students no matter what lol, but I got stuck with a strict school. You'll feel differently when you get into a decent college. Schools that just "pass everybody no matter what" tend to be looked down upon.
Ehh, it snt a "when". I know that age doesnt really matter for college, but im 25 and working a dead end office job, and i cant afford a decent college. It so happens I work for a student loan comany (lol) and seeing how much these milions of people owe is just stomach wrenching amounts. Most of them will never be paid back. Wonder what happens to these people lol. I refuse to dig myself this hole. The US economy is built off of the concept of 'make-believe' money, like credit, and when you cant pay back your loans, your life is over.
|
On June 07 2012 05:41 Kyrillion wrote:
Reading your posts is certainly not going to help me improve in that regard ; especially when you cannot help mentioning a crowd of economical concepts that I reckon could be rephrased quickly for everyone to understand, when they're not void (this wikipedia quote isn't very epiphanic). And may I inform you we don't have the option to take any lessons in economics if we opt for science where I live. I would gladly have attended those. May I also add I'm fairly sure in any civilized country, attacking someone's age is considered equivalent to instantly losing a discussion, especially when they're kind enough to give it away. I also appreciate that you doubt everything I said of myself, while I've so far trusted all your implicit claims. Do you not think I can choose to believe you're thirteen and ask your dad to write half of your posts ? Yet I don't.
Everything else you say I've already answered to.
It is, however, somewhat telling when several people guess your age range and are correct. It would be fairly easy to infer that you share behaviors with many people from that age range. Chances are the people that you are so ready to dismiss once were very similar to you, and have since grown out of it. I guessed your age while reading your first post. Evidently, you are allowed to make observations that others may find offensive and mildly(or overly) judgmental, but others are not extended the same courtesy. Regardless of your age, you are an incredible hypocrit.
On a side note, signalling is an incredibly common concept that stretches much wider than economics. Personally, I've known the term since I was 12. It's in almost every game of incomplete data you have ever played. Even so, you should once again be able to infer what signalling is simply by knowing what a signal is and the context in which it was used. You seem to often make excuses for your mistakes and lack of understanding. One of my favourite sayings has always been "Intelligent people are very, very good at explaining away the stupid things they do". It was once a very bad habit of mine. Some things are your fault, not everybody else's.
If you wish to boast about your intellect, I would start with learning what a paragraph is. Your thoughts are only as good as your ability to present them. Many of your posts are completely unreadable, because they are nothing more than a big wall of text. Even if English isn't your first language, which would explain any other grammar errors, there is no excuse for not using paragraphs. It is also something that is consistent throughout almost all languages in Europe, Australia, North America, and South America.
You assume a lot of knowledge on your behalf. I was like that when I was 18, which wasn't that long ago. Real life teaches you a lot. Hopefully you're less bull-headed than I was at 18, because if you aren't, I'm sure you'll gain nothing from this post; you'll find someway where you are right and I am wrong. Here's to hoping you're better than that, because I won't be responding otherwise. I know that engaging with somebody like that is a practice in futility, for I used to be that person.
|
On June 07 2012 05:41 Kyrillion wrote:
Reading your posts is certainly not going to help me improve in that regard ; especially when you cannot help mentioning a crowd of economical concepts that I reckon could be rephrased quickly for everyone to understand, when they're not void (this wikipedia quote isn't very epiphanic). And may I inform you we don't have the option to take any lessons in economics if we opt for science where I live. I would gladly have attended those. May I also add I'm fairly sure in any civilized country, attacking someone's age is considered equivalent to instantly losing a discussion, especially when they're kind enough to give it away. I also appreciate that you doubt everything I said of myself, while I've so far trusted all your implicit claims. Do you not think I can choose to believe you're thirteen and ask your dad to write half of your posts ? Yet I don't.
Everything else you say I've already answered to.
If it makes you feel better to believe that because your age was called into question you win, well more power too you. The reason why nothing was directly responded too in that post is because you didn't actually say anything. You made lots of statements with few of them being either constructive or coherent. You mostly just bragged about how accomplished you are which implies you aren't old enough to realize that no one cares how smart you believe you are. While that may or may not be true, I am just telling you why everyone is attacking you.
Now if you want to have a serious discourse as to a better system to replace the current one that doesn't allow students who don't care to pass anyhow, well then lets discuss. If you just want to make "I am superior and I say the system sucks" statements which according to your impressive credentials seems to be a bit of an insult to your accomplishments, well then continue on, but don't be surprised when you get blasted. I have never in my life met a single accomplished student who found it alright that students who put in less effort than themselves to be handed a free pass. I have met plenty who have much criticism for the system because of its shortfalls, but none who would support insanity that undermines the quality of education.
If you want to have a serious discussion, feel free to start back a few pages where I target some of the shortfalls of the education system and some potential remedies for it. Now bear in mind the post was somewhat ranty, but I made valid points nonetheless. If you want to argue that giving students a free ride because grades are meaningless, well that isn't a rational discussion and I am unwilling to entertain the blatant idiocy that those policies were born out of.
|
On June 07 2012 05:41 Kyrillion wrote:
Reading your posts is certainly not going to help me improve in that regard ; especially when you cannot help mentioning a crowd of economical concepts that I reckon could be rephrased quickly for everyone to understand, when they're not void (this wikipedia quote isn't very epiphanic). And may I inform you we don't have the option to take any lessons in economics if we opt for science where I live. I would gladly have attended those. May I also add I'm fairly sure in any civilized country, attacking someone's age is considered equivalent to instantly losing a discussion, especially when they're kind enough to give it away. I also appreciate that you doubt everything I said of myself, while I've so far trusted all your implicit claims. Do you not think I can choose to believe you're thirteen and ask your dad to write half of your posts ? Yet I don't.
Everything else you say I've already answered to.
1. I'd say the vast majority of people would understand those economic concepts. They're incredibly basic. In fact, for a supposed valedictorian, you should be able to grasp them all within minutes. And I'm not kidding.
2. You're wrong about the age thing, it's extremely pertinent actually, which is why it's often brought up. Age and experience go a long ways in debates. Clearly you don't know that because you just brought up a supposed garbage precedent that doesn't even exist.
3. As far as I'm aware, I don't believe I've given off any reason for you to suspect I'm 13, while you on the other hand are exuding nearly every stereotype of the typical 18 year old student. That's the issue.
4. You haven't answered even a quarter of it with any backing besides what your own personal belief on what the system is - which is related to your experience and hence age is highly relevant. I've brought economic theory, which isn't even really debated economic theory (which, mind you, a lot of economic theory is) but rather generally accepted by all groups of the spectrum.
You generally just seem to lack experience in all regards (I mean, you've never even had a job, saying you "value knowledge" more, which actually made me laugh out loud, literally). I'm sure you could stomp me in every scientific field out there, even ones you've barely touched on, but concerning the issue at hand, I'm not sure where you've been going with anything.
On June 07 2012 08:35 FrEaK[S.sIR] wrote:
You assume a lot of knowledge on your behalf. I was like that when I was 18, which wasn't that long ago. Real life teaches you a lot. Hopefully you're less bull-headed than I was at 18, because if you aren't, I'm sure you'll gain nothing from this post; you'll find someway where you are right and I am wrong. Here's to hoping you're better than that, because I won't be responding otherwise. I know that engaging with somebody like that is a practice in futility, for I used to be that person.
I'm not even significantly older, but I know I was told this countless times... and ignored it every time, even telling myself I was simply a step above the rest. I still have residuals of it now, but man... reading your post made me chuckle of how I used to be.
|
teachers gives 0s all the time where i live. I deal with it, you dont see me wanting to get the teacher fired. I got a 0 today for not doing my homework, i deserve it. Atleast this teacher was nice enough for you to make it up. Jeez what has the world come to :S
|
|
|
Russian Federation748 Posts
Hoho, you're not enough vultures devouring me, why don't you call some friends so that every single page here consists of 19 statements of my stupidness and my pointless answer.
It is, however, somewhat telling when several people guess your age range and are correct. It would be fairly easy to infer that you share behaviors with many people from that age range. Chances are the people that you are so ready to dismiss once were very similar to you, and have since grown out of it. I guessed your age while reading your first post. Evidently, you are allowed to make observations that others may find offensive and mildly(or overly) judgmental, but others are not extended the same courtesy. Regardless of your age, you are an incredible hypocrit.
Massive fallacy again. First, nothing keeps you from assuming anything with a certain chance of being true. If it's not, you can always either pretend you were right and the other person is lying, or you just made an assumption that turned out wrong. But if you're right, then it was definitely obvious from the very first moment. I should add calling someone "young" is not exactly guessing their age range.
By the way, do you imagine someone exclaiming "Hey, I guess you must be around fourty" on that very thread ? That indeed does not happen. People will always claim their opponent is young, very young, because that's only natural when you want to discredit someone. I guess what most would then do is to make the same accusation in return but I'm above that. Also, please do not feel forced to give away your own age when commenting on other's, that would cost a lot of effort surely.
Everything else you claim is downright blank. Let me just tell you that while it is established people's ideas change over time, nothing proves it depends on a gain of experience. It is all but normal that people grow more conservative when older, and want to maintain things as they are, albeit I never completely understood that process (my ideas tend to not change much, which of course you'll caracterize as immaturity). Students do demonstrate much more than employees (I don't) and one could mention many a demonstration that was legitimate and rightly motivated. Enough of that.
I also have no idea what you mean about observations and courtesy. If I'm such a giant hypocrite, surely you can show it clearly rather than through incomprehensible allusions.
The "we once were similar to you" argument is so void I can't hink of anything to reply. Why don't you tell about yourself instead of cloning me ? How easy is that to claim you've been through someone's ideas and have grown out of it ? Why even discuss if the oldest one instantly is right ? And why cannot you argue on the ideas rather than cloud the issue by discussing the life of others ? It won't work.
1. I'd say the vast majority of people would understand those economic concepts. They're incredibly basic. In fact, for a supposed valedictorian, you should be able to grasp them all within minutes. And I'm not kidding.
When did I claim I don't ? If they're so obvious, why not save me the expense of having to look them up by giving a definition instead of the word. And talking about economics, I really wish to know more about it, however it's not a secret science studies are the hardest and I don't necessarily have all the time I'd need to educate myself in every field.
3. As far as I'm aware, I don't believe I've given off any reason for you to suspect I'm 13, while you on the other hand are exuding nearly every stereotype of the typical 18 year old student. That's the issue.
I'm in second year at 18, speak (nearly) fluent English (barely anyone in France does that, if you didn't know) and try to debate with adults (I'm technically an adult but I'm not used to it yet) when most people my age would simply hush up. We may not use the same definition of stereotype.
You assumed I was younger, I could have assumed you were older and been equally right. Why would that have been ? Because you talk about work and I don't bring it to the debate. What does it imply ? Nothing at all.
Edit : if you notice any language mistakes as it would seem you do, don't refrain from pointing them out. It will profit you by humiliating me, and profit me as well.
Second edit : by the by, while I do not doubt one second Fabled to be older than me, that's not that obvious for everyone else here.
|
On June 03 2012 02:22 sereniity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2012 02:05 Roachu wrote:On June 03 2012 01:47 sereniity wrote:
As I go to school myself I find this a very interesting subject, a question I often bring up is "Are your grades a reflection of your knowledge/skill, or your work put into the class?"
Basically, I feel that even if my english is good enough for grade A, I cannot achieve it unless I come to almost every class and do every piece of homework, even if I get very high scores on my tests. Is this right or wrong?
In my own perfect world, a grade would reflect how a good a certain student is at said subject, not how much time dedicated into it. After all, when I'm looking for a job, my grades should show how good I am at said thing, not how nice I was in class. Just because I didn't come to every English class doesn't mean I wont come to work every day. I know a guy in my english class who is terrible at english, yet he's given grade C. The only reason for that is because he did his homework and was nice to the teacher.
Me on the other hand, had a grudge with the teacher (along with the rest of the class) and I've been having constant meetings with the principal to get ourselves a new teacher (she has a terrible attitude and constantly mocks us, has an aura of prestige as if we're crap and she's the best, yet she can't even spell the word boulder).
Anyway, back on topic, I'm getting an E this year because I basically haven't come to many of her lessons (I have about 60% attendance rate). I did however get a B on my final exams (called 'Nationella Proven' in Sweden).
Maybe this was abit off-topic, I got abit carried away :D... That's a bit of a dicey question I think, since your grades should be a reflection of your knowledge, or maybe rather acquired knowledge. On the other hand how is anyone supposed to know if you're not there? My experience is a lot of courses are poorly structured as they require a lot of attendance in order to pass while the literature might be most of what you need to learn. In university courses attendance doesn't mean shit unless there are mandatory introduction lectures or seminars, but the your score on the exams are what counts. In high school thought most of what counts to your grade is done during classes together with exam results. Though in my experience nobody who skips out on a lot of classes aren't going to post a good result on exams or assignments. Well I'm getting a B or more on every test I'm doing, including the final exams. Without studying at all. That's how they're supposed to know of my knowledge.
Yes but you know beforehand that your grade is made up of x% test, y% homework. If you want good grades you need to work. If you want to pass, good for you, from what you're saying the exam is enough.
Your knowledge of a subject cannot be fully summed up in a simple test, and has no relevance to your experience if it happens to be multiple choice.
Let me put it this way, I could ace some exams but to actually work on something practical there's no experience to back up the knowledge. It happened to me for programming, I was ace-ing every exam because I could come up with the solution and scribble a basic algo, but when it came to making something that works it took time and work to get to a decent speed.
|
On June 07 2012 17:33 Kyrillion wrote:Hoho, you're not enough vultures devouring me, why don't you call some friends so that every single page here consists of 19 statements of my stupidness and my pointless answer. Show nested quote +
It is, however, somewhat telling when several people guess your age range and are correct. It would be fairly easy to infer that you share behaviors with many people from that age range. Chances are the people that you are so ready to dismiss once were very similar to you, and have since grown out of it. I guessed your age while reading your first post. Evidently, you are allowed to make observations that others may find offensive and mildly(or overly) judgmental, but others are not extended the same courtesy. Regardless of your age, you are an incredible hypocrit.
Massive fallacy again. First, nothing keeps you from assuming anything with a certain chance of being true. If it's not, you can always either pretend you were right and the other person is lying, or you just made an assumption that turned out wrong. But if you're right, then it was definitely obvious from the very first moment. I should add calling someone "young" is not exactly guessing their age range. By the way, do you imagine someone exclaiming "Hey, I guess you must be around fourty" on that very thread ? That indeed does not happen. People will always claim their opponent is young, very young, because that's only natural when you want to discredit someone. I guess what most would then do is to make the same accusation in return but I'm above that. Also, please do not feel forced to give away your own age when commenting on other's, that would cost a lot of effort surely. Everything else you claim is downright blank. Let me just tell you that while it is established people's ideas change over time, nothing proves it depends on a gain of experience. It is all but normal that people grow more conservative when older, and want to maintain things as they are, albeit I never completely understood that process (my ideas tend to not change much, which of course you'll caracterize as immaturity). Students do demonstrate much more than employees (I don't) and one could mention many a demonstration that was legitimate and rightly motivated. Enough of that. I also have no idea what you mean about observations and courtesy. If I'm such a giant hypocrite, surely you can show it clearly rather than through incomprehensible allusions. The "we once were similar to you" argument is so void I can't hink of anything to reply. Why don't you tell about yourself instead of cloning me ? How easy is that to claim you've been through someone's ideas and have grown out of it ? Why even discuss if the oldest one instantly is right ? And why cannot you argue on the ideas rather than cloud the issue by discussing the life of others ? It won't work.
I used age range to describe other people's comments. I guessed your exact age from the get go. I quite often try to imagine those who I am talking to, from age to occupation, regardless of personal bias, and find it a good exercise in figuring out what other people are thinking and why. To pigeonhole me into somebody who is so narrowminded that I just assume anybody who disagrees with me is young, while being young myself, shows your character. It's not that I can reason, or know a thing or two, or have been around the block or something like that - it's that you're younger than I am.
I'm not discrediting you, I have not stated whether I agree or disagree with you, nor do I have any desire to discuss that with you. I've talked about your conduct and presentation, nothing else.
I'm 23, as I said, I'm not that much older than you. My age was never requested.
How people's ideas change has to do with many, many more factors than age. In fact, the flexibility people have in their ideas spikes up and down many times throughout a lifetime. Personality, culture, education, upbringing and experience, which while not completely removed from age, is far more important. Experience is derived from what you are exposed to, and how you react and grow from it.
I know you have no idea about observations and courtesy. Which is why you won't understand why you're a hypocrit, and it takes a certain degree of self awareness to be able to admit when one is being a hypocrit. Very few will actually admit to it. It's also completely irrelevant and whether or not you are a hypocrit doesn't change how right or wrong I am.
Telling about myself wouldn't make anybody any less right or wrong. Deflection and dismissal doesn't make you look smart, it makes you look arrogant and incompetent. It's incredibly easy to claim, since almost every 16-20 year old male, especially intelligent(or those who percieve themselves as such), goes through the exact same phase. You're not special.
Nobody claimed the eldest was right, especially not I. People have asserted that your world view may be influenced by your age, and probable lack of experience as a result. Blasphemous, I know.
And I don't argue on ideas because I have nothing to add, or feel that it is pointless to argue with somebody like you about ideas. I did have something to say about your behavior. Why would I want to discuss something with somebody who expects things of me that he doesn't expect from himself? That demands explainations for obviously intangible ideas? Who will readily dismiss almost everything I say, claim conversational superiority, while consquently bringing nothing to the table himself?
Why would I have any desire to discuss ideas with an 18 year old who isn't half as smart as he thinks he is, and has nothing to say that I haven't already heard? I have people that would actually stimulate me, and wouldn't spare any more than the 10 minutes I've used on you already.
|
Ah, boredom, the great time waster.
Now, onto something productive.
For what it's worth, I failed grade 12 at 14, because I decided it was a waste of time and stopped attending altogether. How wrong I was. I wish I knew then what I know now. I would've easily passed with a no-zero policy.
I deserved to fail.
|
This has gotten so far off topic its ridiculous. The teacher gave zeros after the students still did not do their hw/make up exams after multiple warnings, as (in my opinion) he rightfully should, the school made him retract those grades, he refused and was brought up on insubordination charges and suspended.
Whether or not 'someone was valedictorian' or 'is gonna get destroy in the real world because of their attitude towards education and busy work' is irrelevant. Lets try to keep this on topic, it was an interesting ethical issue before it got derailed a bunch of pages ago 
|
Because I need to waste at least 15 minutes a day or I don't feel okay with my life 
Will stop derailing now though, the internet is fills with ways for me to waste my day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
