Pages: 1 … 15 16 17 18

Topic closed

2011-11-20 10:07:09
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

that doesn't really work for academic subjects though, does it? law has an academic side in the study of jurisprudence, with concepts of justice being explored philosophically, but isn't really what you'd call an 'academic' subject. the same with a lot of science, which obviously has a very practical side to it as well as the abstract. how does that rule work in the 'hard' academics subjects, like philosophy, literature, history, or classics? you can't really expect a great philosophy teacher to have "been a philosopher" for severla years before entering the field, haha. some people are just great teachers, i don't think it has so much to do with working in industry. nine out of ten people you dragged from an industry-position into teaching would be shit at it-- they'd lack the charisma, or the drive, or the ability to communicate. i don't think you have to work outside of your field to be good at teaching in academia. in fact, my best teachers are those that have been involved in the absolute best in academia-- as you'd more normally expect.
History and philosophy are things that you teach yourself over a lifetime if you have an interest in it. It doesn't require a million degrees in a subject to become an expert you know...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 10:12:23
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Macbeth wrote:

Jay is an expert in Hegelian philosophy after all.
That's like the tenth time you've linked to that. You know what it means when you keep going back to the same thing over and over and over again? A) You're a stalker, and B) You haven't got shit else. Now kindly go swallow more pills. Thanks.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 10:12:42
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
no but to teach it would suggest you should have some qualification and ability in the academic side of things. you could never teach yourself 'history' and 'philosophy' in the academic sense without the training in the discipline. it's like saying you could teach yourself engineering if only you bought the reading list from amazon and spent some time at home behind a desk. just like in any field or discipline there are a set of rules and guiding principles in 'history' and 'philosophy' (as academic subjects) that requires a lot of training and specialisation to become qualified and adept. having a non-fiction bookshelf at home about the american civil war does not mean you could stroll into yale and teach a term-long course on the civil war, just because you know the 'facts' of the matter. there is far more to academic study than this, and you're naive to think otherwise. so sure, somebody can be 'well read' in philosophy and history, just as someone can be well read in literature, but that is a long way off making them qualified to teach it - especially at a university level. this all stems really from your (wrong) belief that these subjects are somehow 'lesser' subjects, and are accessible and do-able by anyone with the spare time and inclination. it's pretty exasperating to have to continually re-explain to you that there is much more to these subjects than your superficial knowledge of them infers.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 10:13:32
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5803

That's actually the second time I linked to that. I linked to this about 5 times though.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/47545/funny.png
2011-11-20 10:20:02
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

no but to teach it would suggest you should have some qualification and ability in the academic side of things. you could never teach yourself 'history' and 'philosophy' in the academic sense without the training in the discipline. it's like saying you could teach yourself engineering if only you bought the reading list from amazon and spent some time at home behind a desk. just like in any field or discipline there are a set of rules and guiding principles in 'history' and 'philosophy' (as academic subjects) that requires a lot of training and specialisation to become qualified and adept. having a non-fiction bookshelf at home about the american civil war does not mean you could stroll into yale and teach a term-long course on the civil war, just because you know the 'facts' of the matter. there is far more to academic study than this, and you're naive to think otherwise. so sure, somebody can be 'well read' in philosophy and history, just as someone can be well read in literature, but that is a long way off making them qualified to teach it - especially at a university level. this all stems really from your (wrong) belief that these subjects are somehow 'lesser' subjects, and are accessible and do-able by anyone with the spare time and inclination. it's pretty exasperating to have to continually re-explain to you that there is much more to these subjects than your superficial knowledge of them infers.
You can teach yourself anything outside of a structured academic environment uzique. It may not conform to the rituals that you associate with academia, but there's absolutely nothing stopping someone from becoming a world class philosopher or engineer without attending a university. People got along just fine prior to the invention of the university. Even a century ago there was no such thing as formalized engineer training in the UK. Your system was still based on apprenticeships. Did that prevent bridges and factories from being built? No. I'd even go so far as to say that attending a university retards creativity. 99% of what I learned in college was formulas. How to write an essay, how to do a math problem, how to row a boat. It was all formulaic.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 10:25:27
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
my point is that university education at a postgraduate level, i.e. intending to teach university level, is directed at the methods and principles of pedagogy itself. half of my degree right now is to do with methods of research that will make me a good academic, as much as it is studying the actual subject itself. this is a 'ritual', yes, but it's a ritual that producers good university teachers. you were saying that somebody could become 'educated' in a subject without university... we're discussing teachers, are we not? sure, you could enrich yourself personally by reading goethe, but you couldn't teach it in a german class.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 10:49:53
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

my point is that university education at a postgraduate level, i.e. intending to teach university level, is directed at the methods and principles of pedagogy itself. half of my degree right now is to do with methods of research that will make me a good academic, as much as it is studying the actual subject itself. this is a 'ritual', yes, but it's a ritual that producers good university teachers. you were saying that somebody could become 'educated' in a subject without university... we're discussing teachers, are we not? sure, you could enrich yourself personally by reading goethe, but you couldn't teach it in a german class.
If I was fluent in German, I don't see why I couldn't teach it.

I'm confident I could walk into just about any undergraduate, or lower, class on general history today and teach successfully. I've read hundreds of books on the topics and spent much of my time in college history classes correcting my professors. Yes, I was that annoying know-it-all in class, but I know my shit. All it takes to teach successfully is a solid plan. In fact, that's pretty much the only difficult part of the job, coming up with a plan to teach a subject for so many hours a week. Lesson planning.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 10:53:51
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
rofl. no you couldn't teach undergraduate level history, galt. as i said, there is far more to these academic studies than merely knowing the 'facts' and being able to relay them. there are huge issues, critical debates and academic materials surrounding historicity, historiography, epistemology and the study of ideas that you cannot just get from some amazon best-seller in the 'popular history' section. you are supremely arrogant to think that you could teach at a university degree level just because you have read the material and 'know' the history (that 'knowing' of the history and its status is something that is studied at a deep conceptual level in itself). you make me laugh with the shit you come out with.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 11:00:58
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

rofl. no you couldn't teach undergraduate level history, galt. as i said, there is far more to these academic studies than merely knowing the 'facts' and being able to relay them. there are huge issues, critical debates and academic materials surrounding historicity, historiography, epistemology and the study of ideas that you cannot just get from some amazon best-seller in the 'popular history' section. you are supremely arrogant to think that you could teach at a university degree level just because you have read the material and 'know' the history (that 'knowing' of the history and its status is something that is studied at a deep conceptual level in itself). you make me laugh with the shit you come out with.
You're impossible. Keep thinking that the world would not exist without universities though. Ignore the ten thousand years of human history that existed prior to your lofty ivory tower institutions.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 11:05:19
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
galt we're discussing what makes good teachers, here. there is a lot more to being able to TEACH at a university level than knowing about the ten-thousand years of human history blah blah. yeah, okay, you're a history fan. you read history books. but knowing the facts of history IS NOT THE BE ALL AND END ALL OF BEING A UNIVERSITY TEACHER. you are "impossible" when you think you can take a university-level history class as well as someone that has 3 degrees in history, 20 year's of teaching and research experience, and a thorough involvement in their field-- most university teachers run journals, conferences, seminars, independent research groups, publish books, etc. all in their spare time. what do you do? oh okay, you read history books from amazon. and you can teach as well as them. jesus christ. it has nothing to do with me thinking universities are the pinnacle of human development - all i am saying is that they are a heavily specialised environment and require heavily specialised and qualified people to teach in them! just because i've read the complete works of shakespeare and can quote you at length scenes from any play, it does not mean i can convene a shakespeare course at cambridge university! you say you are "confident you can walk into just about any undergraduate university class" and teach. teach them what? the shit they already know, because they can read amazon 'general' and 'popular' history too? well done, top class teaching. you are talking utter shite.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 11:10:59
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

galt we're discussing what makes good teachers, here. there is a lot more to being able to TEACH at a university level than knowing about the ten-thousand years of human history blah blah. yeah, okay, you're a history fan. you read history books. but knowing the facts of history IS NOT THE BE ALL AND END ALL OF BEING A UNIVERSITY TEACHER. you are "impossible" when you think you can take a university-level history class as well as someone that has 3 degrees in history, 20 year's of teaching and research experience, and a thorough involvement in their field-- most university teachers run journals, conferences, seminars, independent research groups, publish books, etc. all in their spare time. what do you do? oh okay, you read history books from amazon. and you can teach as well as them. jesus christ. it has nothing to do with me thinking universities are the pinnacle of human development - all i am saying is that they are a heavily specialised environment and require heavily specialised and qualified people to teach in them! just because i've read the complete works of shakespeare and can quote you at length scenes from any play, it does not mean i can convene a shakespeare course at cambridge university! you say you are "confident you can walk into just about any undergraduate university class" and teach. teach them what? the shit they already know, because they can read amazon 'general' and 'popular' history too? well done, top class teaching. you are talking utter shite.
Just like high school teachers, the majority of professors I've been exposed to teach out of the book. You have some exalted view of professors, and maybe you went to some amazing university where every last professor you came into contact with was an expert in his field and spent his off time researching in order to make his students better. Most of us had professors that fucked around in their off time, took weeks to grade papers and tests because they really didn't give a shit, and took the job because it gave them summers off and a lot of vacation time. That's why you are the only one defending the teaching profession in this thread. 99% of the teachers/professors I've run into teach out of the book. If they're old, they've been teaching the same (and undoubtedly out of date) lesson plan for 40-50 years. Yes, I can do a better job than that 99%.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 11:17:14
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
galt i think a huge part of this, again, comes from the fact that your experience of english and history is through minor elective 'general' and introductory courses taught as part of your wider engineering degree. you've dipped your toes into 'general history' (as you call it) and, because you did it whilst at college, you think that is what a college-level history degree is all about. that's a huge error in thinking. just like you claimed that university level english was easy because you got an A on a class assignment to write a fucking high-school book report as part of your 'degree', you claim you can teach meaningfully and proficiently in a history department at a university. christ i don't know how shit your college actually was, but over here we prefer people that are a little more knowledgable to teach academic subjects - people with original ideas and people that are enthusiastic about their field to the point where teaching and research in it has been their life's work. you vastly underestimate and under-rate the demands of an academic teacher because through your small, narrow experience of 'academic' education (academic there in huge caution-quote marks) you think you have 'experienced it all'. maybe you should hook up with nukchebi0 for some part-time history tutoring, help him brush up on the classnotes he's failing to be given at yale. i know for a fact you probably are a lot less knowledgeable about history than an average history undergraduate at any decent uk university, let alone to be able to teach the fucking stuff with a huge command of the field. as i said, i don't venerate the university as the finest institution in society, but i do rate my professors as knowing their fucking stuff, and i do believe that they eat, sleep and breathe the stuff they teach. as i'd expect them to - they take a £60-100k salary from the state and i'm getting in immense debt in order to attend their insightful lessons myself. i would not pay £9,000 a year to hear you regurgitate wikipedia-level history, nor to recycle the ideas and thoughts of SOMEONE ELSE'S books.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 11:19:11
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England

Uzique wrote:

galt i think a huge part of this, again, comes from the fact that your experience of english and history is through minor elective 'general' and introductory courses taught as part of your wider engineering degree. you've dipped your toes into 'general history' (as you call it) and, because you did it whilst at college, you think that is what a college-level history degree is all about. that's a huge error in thinking. just like you claimed that university level english was easy because you got an A on a class assignment to write a fucking high-school book report as part of your 'degree', you claim you can teach meaningfully and proficiently in a history department at a university. christ i don't know how shit your college actually was, but over here we prefer people that are a little more knowledgable to teach academic subjects - people with original ideas and people that are enthusiastic about their field to the point where teaching and research in it has been their life's work. you vastly underestimate and under-rate the demands of an academic teacher because through your small, narrow experience of 'academic' education (academic there in huge caution-quote marks) you think you have 'experienced it all'. maybe you should hook up with nukchebi0 for some part-time history tutoring, help him brush up on the classnotes he's failing to be given at yale. i know for a fact you probably are a lot less knowledgeable about history than an average history undergraduate at any decent uk university, let alone to be able to teach the fucking stuff with a huge command of the field. as i said, i don't venerate the university as the finest institution in society, but i do rate my professors as knowing their fucking stuff, and i do believe that they eat, sleep and breathe the stuff they teach. as i'd expect them to - they take a £60-100k salary from the state and i'm getting in immense debt in order to attend their insightful lessons myself. i would not pay £9,000 a year to hear you regurgitate wikipedia-level history, nor to recycle the ideas and thoughts of SOMEONE ELSE'S books.
Have you ever tutored anyone?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 11:27:16
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
i've given english tutoring to high-school and pre-college level kids wanting some extra help (with pushy parents willing to pay for extra-curricular teaching), yes. it's easy work experience and way-easy money for a college undergraduate-- talking £25/hour for a not-demanding-at-all portion of time per week. i've also given advice and have freelanced writing, editing and proof-reading to people, other ancillary/secondary (and marketable) skills that you acquire when studying an english degree (as you'd expect, surely). helping 12-16 year olds brush up on their knowledge in order to help them pass high-school level exams (from the perspective of someone that has sat and excelled in those exams < 5 years ago) is not the same as 'proper' teaching, nor would i pretend it to be. personal tutoring is a very small and extra, supplementary service to the main task of teaching: it is far more demanding and difficult to teach and engage someone about something in the first-place than it is to help them revise and brush up for an exam/course-paper. i can do the latter, teachers are challenged every day with the former. and i don't believe for a second you could do the teaching part. i'm a perfect top-class student on paper and i wouldn't even have the arrogance to say i could teach university level english-- i'm still years off having that level of erudition and familiarity with my subject. you don't even have a history degree, let alone a 'strong' one that marks out your talents and excellence in the subject. you could not teach it. it is as simple as that.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-20 11:29:12
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5576|London, England
We'll see uzique. Teaching history when I retire is an idea I've been kicking around for a long time now. I doubt I'll have any issues at all.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-11-20 11:36:12
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6740|...

This is what this thread is about ...

blademaster wrote:

This thread is for any type of work or problems which you may be having while you are attending university/college so if you have any problems or want to bitch about stuff how hard something is or how things done make sense post here.
Please stay on topic.
2011-11-20 12:17:33
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6542|New Haven, CT

Uzique wrote:

maybe you should hook up with nukchebi0 for some part-time history tutoring, help him brush up on the classnotes he's failing to be given at yale.
lol what was the point of that
2011-11-21 02:55:56
PrivateVendetta
I DEMAND XMAS THEME
+704|6409|Roma
Uzique still hasn't learned to paragraph
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png
2011-11-21 04:28:18
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6989|PNW

And you didn't punctuate. Point?

jsnipy wrote:

This is what this thread is about ...

blademaster wrote:

This thread is for any type of work or problems which you may be having while you are attending university/college so if you have any problems or want to bitch about stuff how hard something is or how things done make sense post here.
Please stay on topic.
2011-11-21 07:17:47
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688

PrivateVendetta wrote:

Uzique still hasn't learned to paragraph
you clearly don't know what a paragraph really is. thanks though, i'll take writing tips from the foundation kid. i'm sure you're the bard of the skies, buddy.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-21 07:22:13
Roc18
`
+655|6008|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

Uzique wrote:

i've given english tutoring to high-school and pre-college level kids wanting some extra help (with pushy parents willing to pay for extra-curricular teaching), yes. it's easy work experience and way-easy money for a college undergraduate-- talking £25/hour for a not-demanding-at-all portion of time per week. i've also given advice and have freelanced writing, editing and proof-reading to people, other ancillary/secondary (and marketable) skills that you acquire when studying an english degree (as you'd expect, surely). helping 12-16 year olds brush up on their knowledge in order to help them pass high-school level exams (from the perspective of someone that has sat and excelled in those exams < 5 years ago) is not the same as 'proper' teaching, nor would i pretend it to be. personal tutoring is a very small and extra, supplementary service to the main task of teaching: it is far more demanding and difficult to teach and engage someone about something in the first-place than it is to help them revise and brush up for an exam/course-paper. i can do the latter, teachers are challenged every day with the former. and i don't believe for a second you could do the teaching part. i'm a perfect top-class student on paper and i wouldn't even have the arrogance to say i could teach university level english-- i'm still years off having that level of erudition and familiarity with my subject. you don't even have a history degree, let alone a 'strong' one that marks out your talents and excellence in the subject. you could not teach it. it is as simple as that.
Know it all.
https://g.bf3stats.com/pc/gcv8Vckg/roc18.png
BF3s.com Public Leaderboard
2011-11-21 07:29:49
presidentsheep
Back to the Fuhrer
+208|6179|Places 'n such
On a slightly related note. Uzique, how did you manage to get into tutoring for money?
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
2011-11-21 07:40:16
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6688
because i'm well qualified enough? this uni is in one of the richest areas in the country and it is full of pushy parents that don't have the time in their busy city lifestyles to help their kids brush up on their homework, but certainly have the money. it's easy to make £25/hour doing it when you include your travel costs and your actual value. teaching GCSE level english is easy (and I can boast that I got the 2nd highest GCSE English mark in the country in my year, which is a mega salespitch). it's really not hard. during the first few weeks of every academic year our careers service is always inundated with requests for private tutors from the university student body. also there are plenty of private tutoring companies that will take you on and arrange it for you... for a cut of the price, of course.

and lol roc, how am i being a "know it all"? you fucking mong. jay tried to challenge my argument by saying "have you tutored yourself?" and i said "well, yes, actually..." that's not being a know it all. it's called posting with some actual backup and evidence. which may surprise you, seeing as 90% of 'debate' posts on this forum from the likes of jay are based in sweet-fuck-all.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2011-11-21 07:47:01
Roc18
`
+655|6008|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

Uzique wrote:

because i'm well qualified enough? this uni is in one of the richest areas in the country and it is full of pushy parents that don't have the time in their busy city lifestyles to help their kids brush up on their homework, but certainly have the money. it's easy to make £25/hour doing it when you include your travel costs and your actual value. teaching GCSE level english is easy (and I can boast that I got the 2nd highest GCSE English mark in the country in my year, which is a mega salespitch). it's really not hard. during the first few weeks of every academic year our careers service is always inundated with requests for private tutors from the university student body. also there are plenty of private tutoring companies that will take you on and arrange it for you... for a cut of the price, of course.

and lol roc, how am i being a "know it all"? you fucking mong. jay tried to challenge my argument by saying "have you tutored yourself?" and i said "well, yes, actually..." that's not being a know it all. it's called posting with some actual backup and evidence. which may surprise you, seeing as 90% of 'debate' posts on this forum from the likes of jay are based in sweet-fuck-all.
Mong? What will you call me next a muppet? lol yuros. You seem like a cool/smart dude but come off as arrogant and a "know it all"; are you like this in person?
https://g.bf3stats.com/pc/gcv8Vckg/roc18.png
BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

Topic closed

Pages: 1 … 15 16 17 18

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard