Re: Are physics cranks employed?
- From: "Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 18:50:28 GMT
<edprochak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > As far as teachers go (at High School level) in my experience
| > (with 20-20 hindsight) the majority are unthinking parrots guiding
| > the student through a curriculum, which is not tailored to each
| > individual. Practically, of course, it cannot be.
| > I had an excellent math teacher and a piss-taking history teacher.
| > The other students thought the history teacher was funny, I considered
| > him a jerk. Matters were reversed when it came to the math
| > teacher, the other students were bored, three or four of us delighted.
| > Careers are decided on by the level of interest the teacher awakens
| > in the student, there are definitely good teachers and bad just as
| > there are good drivers and bad, good cooks and bad, and yes, good
| > engineers and bad.
| > Engineers, though, are team players, they have to be, and the bad
| > soon get weeded out. So are surgeons. Lives are endangered when
| > engineering is bad, the engineer takes on an awesome responsibility,
| > as does the surgeon.
| > Those that can, do. Those that cannot, teach.
| This phrase has been used as a putdown for teachers for decades. It
| shows the bias of the speaker. It shows that you have never tried to
| teach. Molding minds, and instilling interest is a hell of a lot harder
| than molding steel and instilling artificial flavors.
| In engineering, you have nice repeatability. Once you solve a problem,
| the solution works, time after time. In teaching, once you prepare a
| lesson plan that works, you often find it fails on next years students.
| Each student is different. Each class is different.
| (Note: if you think you tried teaching because you taught a college
| level class, the you haven't faced the real issue. Try it in a public
| school, high school or grade school level and note the difference.)
| > My definition of a crank is someone that unthinkingly accepts
| > such garbage as the "Lorentz" cuckoo transformations without
| > examining thoroughly their derivation. PD is a crank.
| > Androcles
| meanwhile you unknowingly accept such garbage about teachers.
| Sorry if you happened to get more than your fair share of poor
| teachers, but you draw the wrong conclusion based on that sample data.
In engineering, once you prepare a design that works, you often find it
discarded on next year's model. Each plane or car is different.
Each year is different.
(Note: if you think you tried engineering because you tightened a screw
or changed a tyre, then you haven't faced the real issue. Try it in a
or at a drawing board and note the difference.)
Meanwhile you unknowingly accept such garbage about Engineers.
Sorry if you happened to get more than your fair share of bad light bulbs,
but you draw the wrong conclusion based on that sample data.
- Prev by Date: Re: Taking T.J.'s insults.
- Next by Date: Re: Are physics cranks employed?
- Previous by thread: Re: Are physics cranks employed?
- Next by thread: Re: Are physics cranks employed?