"Bill Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:mailman.202.1327961928.25230.digitalmars-d-annou...@puremagic.com... > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Nick Sabalausky <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> I can't speak for Andrei, but I discovered after 4 years of university >> >> that I >> >> had become much better at learning new things. >> >> > >> > I believe that learning how to learn better is probably the most >> important >> > thing to learn at the University. >> >> Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. All you need to learn how to learn is a >> library, not a $100k debt payable to useless pompous windbags. The >> biggest >> thing colleges teach is that their existence is actually needed for >> anything. And even *that* much is pure grade-A bullcrap. >> >> Yea, you *can* learn such things at college: just like how I can sell you >> a >> $5k device to help you convert ice into water. >> >> > Libraries don't give you deadlines (except for when to return your books)
Having deadlines doesn't need to cost $100k. > or feedback on how well you are doing. If you're relying on the tests to tell you how well you're doing, then you've already failed. *You* are by far the best person to know whether *you* understand something or not. A school's evaluation is *NOT* for the student's sake - it's purely for the school's/teacher's own accountability. It's inherently innacurate, but needed anyway simply because they can't read your mind for an "I understand" or "I don't get it" - but you *can* read your own mind, so for the student, test results are extra time, extra money and *less* accurate, all for no benefit. > Some people need that. >
