Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

You get good grades in university by making things simple

Status
Not open for further replies.
equationgirl said:
Cheesy, cheesy, cheesy.

I thought you'd stopped making these posts.

Come one, at least expand one your post a bit.

See how that was brushed over.

I'd hazard a guess that she's writing a "back to college" article for some magazine or other.
 
IN appropriate response to the OP:

"Baws".

I grade this post a double first at PhD of God level.

You may all employ me for basquillions of readies now, ty.

I shall be awaiting teh offaaahz in my inbox.
 
equationgirl said:
Being able to communicate complex ideas so that people with no prior knowledge of the subject can follow and understand them is always a good skill to have.

However, this does not equate to making things simple.

Also, it's not just a matter of rephrasing things in a simplictic manner to get a 2:1. You'd have to show some degree of original thoughts, ideas and opinions as well as a grasp of complex aspects of the subject area.

well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?
 
twisted said:
See how that was brushed over.

I'd hazard a guess that she's writing a "back to college" article for some magazine or other.

no chance. Your style most definitely and i pity you for saying it.
 
Cheesypoof said:
well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?
Cheesypoof said:
i did, but no big deal. i have never thought it anything special.
Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like.

But it's even less not-special than a 2:1, eh? ;)
 
mrs quoad said:
Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like.

But it's even less not-special than a 2:1, eh? ;)

i would always want a first sorry.
 
mrs quoad said:
Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like. But it's even less not-special than a 2:1? ;)

Yes, I met a few people in a cobwebbed corner of London who said they'd be happy with a 'Desmond'*.


* 2:2 apparently**


** you know, as in Tutu.
 
Guruchelles said:

WELL.

It's simple.

You get a double first! :)

With kittens! :)

And a simple piglet called trevor:

pig.jpg
 
Cheesypoof said:
high achiever i suppose.
There's a difference between being a high achiever, and being able to rightly and fairly recognise one's own (and others') achievements... :)

'High achiever' can be an excuse for never letting yaself be good enough. Always needing to do better.

Which can be quite a sad place to be, IMO. And IME. Driven but... Going nowhere. Because IME for a long time the best I could do was what I *should* be doing. So wasn't owt to be proud of / wasn't anything special.

"Better a pig (called Trevor) and happy, than Socrates and unhappy" innit :)

Someone who's happy with a 2:2 / third is - IMO - better off than someone who's got a first but isn't proud of it / happy with it.
 
Groucho said:
Was that your degree subject?:cool:

No, mechanical engineering with energy resource engineering (1st) - but if I'd got a 2:1 I'd have been pleased.

I just did the best I could, because I didn't want to leave uni thinking I could have worked harder.
 
mrs quoad said:
There's a difference between being a high achiever, and being able to rightly and fairly recognise one's own (and others') achievements... :)

'High achiever' can be an excuse for never letting yaself be good enough. Always needing to do better.

Which can be quite a sad place to be, IMO. And IME. Driven but... Going nowhere. Because IME for a long time the best I could do was what I *should* be doing. So wasn't owt to be proud of / wasn't anything special.

"Better a pig (called Trevor) and happy, than Socrates and unhappy" innit :)

Someone who's happy with a 2:2 / third is - IMO - better off than someone who's got a first but isn't proud of it / happy with it.

nah, i was always disappointed with a 2:1. its really simple with me. its like my journalism, i want the front cover, or my story is still good, but not great. Same with my study ambitions i suppose.
 
Cheesypoof said:
nah, i was always disappointed with a 2:1. its really simple with me. its like my journalism, i want the front cover, or my story is still good, but not great. Same with my study ambitions i suppose.

It is a strange university indeed which awards first class degrees to someone who appears unaware that sentences start with a capital letter and end with a full stop.
 
Funky_monks said:
It is a strange university indeed which awards first class degrees to someone who appears unaware that sentences start with a capital letter and end with a full stop.
I don't think cheesy's degree was in English, iirc - which might explain it. It may have been a non-essay-type subject.
 
spanglechick said:
I don't think cheesy's degree was in English, iirc - which might explain it. It may have been a non-essay-type subject.

You mean English is not the language the course was given in?

My degree wasn't in an "essay subject" either, assuming that that covers most of the arts.
 
Funky_monks said:
You mean English is not the language the course was given in?

My degree wasn't in an "essay subject" either, assuming that that covers most of the arts.
No, I meant English as an academic subject.

My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.
 
spanglechick said:
No, I meant English as an academic subject.

My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.

You're basically implying she did one of the 'green crayon' degrees, aren't you? :D
 
spanglechick said:
No, I meant English as an academic subject.

My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.

You mean that if she did, say art or......ooh.....surf studies at the University of Newquay, she may well have been unaware that sentences begin with a capital and end with a full stop?
 
Johnny Canuck2 said:
I got good grades at university by ensuring that I understood what it was that they were teaching me, then being able to explain it back in a satisfactory manner.

exactly, mr cannuck, thats what i am talking about :cool:
 
Groucho said:
But maths is just a memory thing and was divised by people who want to classify everything in to neat little packages. It is the perfect example of oversimplification. Mostly it is just not real at all. Numbers are like Hobbits. Only duller.
Maths is axiomatically correct in every established respect - that is it's obsession. The beauty of it is that the obsession has given us the most precise, beautiful and unfathomably complex language known to man. It is not the language of science, it is the language of nature - which is why it is sometimes the only way to accurately express scientific ideas.

It is not oversimplification. From the tiny number of axioms, an enormous field has developed, frequently with brand new scientific fields finding that old and presumed useless abstract concepts were exactly what they needed to solve a real world problem.

Complexity can come from simplicity. It's the same principle behind Haiku - restrict the options and release some incredible creativity as a result.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom