Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

insidehighered.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 130 posts

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#121

Post by adrianratnapala »

ebcode wrote: post #91
autokad wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@ryandrak "irregardless" is a word

that's one of those gotcha words, though, like "inflammable" (contrast w/ "indestructible"), and "denuded".

Do you mean that "irregardless" would have to be one of those gotcha words if it did indeed exist?

"Inflammable" is confusing because it sounds like the opposite of "flammable"; but the sad fact of history is that "inflammable" has meant "burnable" for centuries while the synonym "flammable" was made up recently -- so we are stuck with both.

But as far as I know, the word "regardless" has been around for ages, and that's fine because it sounds like just what it means: the opposite of "with regard". Whereas "irregardless" should be chucked in the bin as a confusing neologism that sounds like the opposite of what the speaker intends.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#122

Post by Kluny »

nitwit005 wrote: post #110
homonculus1 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Critical thinking isn't some kind of academic jargon. It literally means applying criticism to the subject of thought.

And? It's normal for words to drift in meaning over time. You have to deal with the reality of language, not "how it's supposed to be".

Yeah, but that's still not what critical thinking means.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#123

Post by Kluny »

flukus wrote: post #116
lr4444lr wrote: post #32

But Brandon Busteed, executive director of Gallup's higher education division, which also conducts research related to graduates and careers, said these sorts of definitions can vary For instance, Gallup has found that generally an employer believes that "critical thinking" is coming up with new, original thought. But in an academic sense, it can mean more picking apart ideas in depth, he said. Given that their defin…

"new, original thought" to the employers probably just means that they can deal with a problem that doesn't fit into the general workflow or one that they haven't been specifically trained to do. As an example, the payment system at my pub went down a few weeks ago and the staff where clueless on what to do, the accepted short term solution (at my insistence) to write down who bought what (we all have accounts) so th…

That's creative thinking, but not critical thinking.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#124

Post by flukus »

Kluny wrote: post #123
flukus wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"new, original thought" to the employers probably just means that they can deal with a problem that doesn't fit into the general workflow or one that they haven't been specifically trained to do. As an example, the payment system at my pub went down a few weeks ago and the staff where clueless on what to do, the accepted short term solution (at my insistence) to write down who bought what (we all have accounts) so th…

That's creative thinking, but not critical thinking.

The solution might be creative (in this case it might be more memory of how things used to work than creativity), but first you have to isolate the issue, theorize on how long it will be out and what the consequences of that are and determine if you should do something or just wait. Then you have to weigh several solutions which could include nothing or multiple solutions for different cases. There are many critical thinking steps involved and some very incomplete data to base them on.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#125

Post by tonyedgecombe »

dvtv75 wrote: post #115
bpchaps wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I answered this in one of my first interviews with, "My greatest weakness is my inability to focus on things for an extended period of time." The interviewer told me never to do that, but appreciated my candor and extended an offer, though I didn't take the job. Sometimes it actually works to be honest instead of treating it as a game. :)

This leaves me conflicted. I've noted here (quite) a number of times that I have a disability that impacts my ability to absorb chunks of written material. I've had an occupational therapist tell me that I shouldn't work in CS or IT (I have a CS degree in spite of that), and several doctors have told me I should stay away from the field, while others have told me that just go with whatever works and don't tell employ…

If they don't ask, do I bring it up?

Most people without a disability would focus on their positive attributes, I can't see why you should be any different.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#126

Post by ebcode »

adrianratnapala wrote: post #121
ebcode wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's one of those gotcha words, though, like "inflammable" (contrast w/ "indestructible"), and "denuded".

Do you mean that "irregardless" would have to be one of those gotcha words if it did indeed exist? "Inflammable" is confusing because it sounds like the opposite of "flammable"; but the sad fact of history is that "inflammable" has meant "burnable" for centuries while the synonym "flammable" was made up recently -- so we are stuck with both. But as far as I know, the word "regardless" has been around for ages, and th…

The word "irregardless" exists, whether you/I/we want it to or not.[0,1] All I can say is that it is indeed surprising how quickly confusing neologisms that should be chucked in the bin soon become sad facts of history.

It's not in the same category as "for all intensive purposes". But that's just the way language evolves. "Intensive" in that case should be "intents and", which, I believe has the same heritage as "clear and present danger", "crimes and misdemeanors", and "cease and desist". All these phrases are redundant lawyer-speak that came about when the law was being translated from Latin to English in the, what, 14th century in England?

So, yeah, there are people who want to _sound_ educated, thinking they'll use a high-falutin' phrase like "for all intents and purposes", they get it wrong and say "for all intensive purposes", and instantly reveal themselves as the uneducated person they actually are. (But only if their present company includes an actually educated person, of course.)

But rather than passing judgment on uneducated folks for using eggcorns[2], it would be more compassionate to reserve that judgment for the actual content and meaning of their speech, and not the superficial form it takes.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/irregardless-real-word-regard... [2] http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#127

Post by bpchaps »

dvtv75 wrote: post #115
bpchaps wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I answered this in one of my first interviews with, "My greatest weakness is my inability to focus on things for an extended period of time." The interviewer told me never to do that, but appreciated my candor and extended an offer, though I didn't take the job. Sometimes it actually works to be honest instead of treating it as a game. :)

This leaves me conflicted. I've noted here (quite) a number of times that I have a disability that impacts my ability to absorb chunks of written material. I've had an occupational therapist tell me that I shouldn't work in CS or IT (I have a CS degree in spite of that), and several doctors have told me I should stay away from the field, while others have told me that just go with whatever works and don't tell employ…

If the companies that you're interviewing for aren't accepting of the way you are, then it might be useful to question whether those companies are for you. Yes, it's difficult to think this way when the specifics of your circumstances are difficult, but it still might be a lifestyle worth pursuing. Lentils/rice/chick peas are a super cheap way of living on a budget ;).

It's exceptionally difficult having disabilities, especially when trying to relate it in a professional environment. Though, I've found my own disabilities have been very useful in figuring out what it is that I really want out of a career and life.

Cheers and good luck.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#128

Post by msla »

robbick wrote: post #66
peruvian wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've had fruitless discussions on this very site where people will argue that it doesn't matter how you use the language if, ultimately, the message somehow manages to get conveyed. Most of the time terrible language does manage to hinder the message! But the writer doesn't realize this, because for them it's obvious. I had a coworker (who is almost 30 and a college graduate) with this very attitude. A lot of his c…

Agreed - I think the 'its how the message gets conveyed' only applies to really trivial things, like 'expresso', or whom vs who where the incorrect version is so clear that it doesn't affect the readability.

The "who" versus "whom" thing is a dialectical difference, only worse, in that the dialect which uses "whom" is entirely artificial at this point, and only serves as a class marker. Saying it's "more correct" is a rather nasty bit of classism.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#129

Post by solidsnack9000 »

wavegeek wrote: post #104
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do undermine one’s credibility. At the same time, a cursory study of German, French, Hebrew, even Japanese would suggest that English spelling is needlessly complicated and ambiguous. Part of addressing this problem for future generations is a push for spelling reform.

I've learned a lot of languages and they all have their problems. E.g. the horribly complicated broken Kanji characters in Japanese and Chinese. E.g. the almost completely pointless genders in German, and resulting requirements for other words changing in regular and irregular ways in agreement. Similarly verb tenses are insanely over-complicated. English is reasonably easy to learn compared to many other languages.…

Some things about English are easier than other languages, but it’s spelling is uniquely complicated. There are roughly 55 phonemes in English and 1500 distinct spellings for them. In most languages the ratio is closer to 1:2, not 1:30.

Phonetic writing could increase ambiguity but in many cases will not because:

(a) Many of the weird redundant spellings only show up in multi-syllabic words that are quite distinctive, as for example ti for ʃ in caution.

(b) People often can tell apart many shorter homophones, which are frequently mis-spelled by being substituted for each other: road/rode, or their/they’re/there. The fact they are frequently substituted for one another is a clue to the degree which context disambiguates them.

Re: Overconfident Students, Dubious Employers

#130

Post by jackvalentine »

austincheney wrote: post #112
jackvalentine wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then the person misunderstood what education is and reality is about to slap them in the face. Sure, but that doesn't change that it's heavily implied by the education industry and society as you grow up what OP said. If your entire life someone's been telling you an orange is an apple then when asked "what's that?" you'll answer an apple.

Perhaps I am fortunate to have grown up around technology. I knew network engineers who went to work straight out of high school without any college making $80k per year. There is a college major to configure routers and switches. It is just something you learn from gaining access to the hardware, reading books, and practicing. I knew this because I was interested in technology and I was find people who were already…

Recognising the issue doesn’t require you to feel sorry for them.
Post reply on HN