Posted by alexandra_k on January 27, 2019, at 22:17:06
In reply to Re: clash, posted by alexandra_k on January 27, 2019, at 17:50:29
and it really is all about the deadline.
and about diminishing returns.
under the old system (of loss of 5 per cent, or one grade point per day) i did hear of people waiting a day thinking they could make more than one grade up. but the good students (the ones who didn't piss about in the first place) discovered that the difference was more 2 or 3 per cent when you are looking in the B+ / A- / A / A+ sort of grade ranges and not one whole grades worth, unless you really messed up (and wanted to gamble with going on to mess up your other deadlines). so it wasn't worth taking the extra time.
so they learned to work to time. to satisfice a bit. to say 'good enough' before passing it on to the next guy for grading or assessment or whatever. that isn't to say they didn't do the best they could in the time they had. maybe working to mid-night if they could pull it off without making things worse for other things (shuffling procrastination around) for other classes.
i was good at managing my time. i liked the psychology modules that required you to do that by juggling more less points value classes. you got good at time management and at working hard to bring up your weakest link for the GPA. it was... fun. i learned a lot. flow. working to capacity. working to my capacity of juggling how little sleep i could get away with and so on...
it starts with a deadline. and meeting the deadline. like how the kids do examinations and time's up and they're done. though i guess these days it's more likely they'll intentionally design the exams so you only need about 1/2 the time so there is no way the exam can tell the difference between the kids who can work to time and the kids who can't (because then we might have to acknowledge that some of them can actually work to time).
there is this medrevue thing the kids do... like a gleeclub sort of a performance thing. some of them are filmed sometimes. i saw one and there was a song and there was a line about how 'i've forgotten more than an arts student learns in a lifetime'. and i thought 'ouch' at the time. but an aspect of it rings true. only the truth of it is more 'i've forgotten more than an arts student is allowed to learn in a lifetime'. and that's the way of it. either too much or not enough. never ever ever ever ever the case that people can work to their flow and build their capacity...
that would be more like the free world.
but it's the deadline that makes it different. possible. an end in sight.
the knowledge of diminishing returns.
and also the knowledge that you can spend your life revising things different (or sometimes even worse) trading off one problem for another problem that is even worse, or whatever. at some point you gotta call 'good enough. time! done'.
the thing with graduate school is: but when's that?
best i can figure...
you should draw on what you know. what you did right to get you there.
what worked for me what working to the deadlines. working to a timeline. at the start of the year numbering out those working weeks and putting in all my assessment dates and my lecture dates and times so i knew exactly where i was supposed to be and when and what was coming and so i could manage my time.
but when you do research then you don't have those external guidelines. so what's to stop you still working on it 10 years later?
the undergraduate guidelines, seems to me.
a 120 point program of study is 1 academic year's work. whether it be a first year, second year, third year, or honours year. whether it be a masters year or a mphil year or a phd.
that's 30 working weeks and up to 12 weeks of examination. for every 120 points.
and that's all.
seems to me.
the issue is having a light touch...
having a light touch.
the issue in why i post here instead of talking to my 'friends' is different people have different... things they need to hear. some people need a heavy hand and some people need a light hand. dan john is a wonderful coach -- some of his early stuff if genius (they recognised it far too late -- but glad to see he's getting some reward now). but anyway, one of the things he was great at was how coaching cues can be very different from the reality of the situation. if you can tell the athlete to try and do x or to imagine they are trying to do y then those things can be lies -- but the things they need to hear that get them doing what it is that they are supposed to be doing (the ideal movement pattern / muscle activation sequence.
my dad always said i needed a really light touch. it used to... he didn't like it how mother would scream at me and hit me because he only needed to speak sternly or raise his hand like he was thinking about it... and i would orient to him and listen. i only ever needed a really light touch. and i was was responsive to instruction and reason.
i need to think of it for myself (so i do the best work i can do, right now) that it only needs a light touch. the lightest of touches. not much work at all. only a couple hours.
(and it will be more work -- but it won't feel like it after a couple hours).
but mostly resisting the urge to change everything that could be better. becuase that will likely be a time sink leading to much anguish and trading of one error for another.
i have read through the examiner reports multiple times. and they have pulled out the bits the think are the worst / most in need of fixing up. i think... in reading through... i basically agree...
so it basically is about trusting my judgement. those particular things.
often i do have references in mind.. newspapers. i wasn't sure how philosophy would cope with those. but they don't seem to mind them.
there are lots of newspaper articles on slum housing and executive salary and so on... that's mostly where i got the stuff from in the first place. i can reference journalists. sure i can.
there hasn't been much academic freedom at uni under the last government.
there was a housing bubble... they didn't want to call it a bubble. speculative housing financial crisis type of thing.
we told ourself we weren't affected.
but what happened was it slowly made it's way here...
it is on it's way here...
it's just about here.
yeah. we are just aboout there.
but still, people are sell sell sell trying to get their money out all surreptitious like.
selling up the boarding houses ('flats')..
buying into aged care institutions or private hospitals.
anyway...
a light touch. not much time. just a few references here and there adn typos over there. rephrase some rhetorical questions and careful about insinuating that these high payed people have chosen to invest their money in the speculative markets... because i don't know. i don't have access to their bank accounts or where they put there money. MPs own heaps of rentals (that was disclosed somewhere) but i don't know for sure it was them in particular who privately brought up all the state houses and / or intentionally or unintentionally put the brakes on housing regulations with respect to habitable houses with a heat source and so on...
yeah.
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1102325
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20181106/msgs/1103016.html