Reminding by 'hard'

Canadian Universities Forum (discussion group)

Subject: Reminding by 'hard'

Universities should understand ´remembering by hard´ is becoming a problem among students. This is not clear to me.
´remembering by hard´ is to mean taking it directly according to the view by many students. You may need a lot of English to understand a specific theory. But once you understood that ´what is wrong with taking that Engish directly´. It is becoming true everywhere. A certain scientific theory says something. If you know and understand it, that is good. If you remind it, what is the problem. A person who always speak about ´the theory of relativity´ is not the wrong person. The person who modifies is the wrong person. Modification is not allowed without understanding the consequence of a word replacement. Scientists have mission for using a specific word. I was critcised for not modifying theories. I will never change this. I always read about theory and understand it, but I never change the word composition of a theory. In an enzyme regulation theory ´key and lock theory´ can never be changed. A person who modifies this theory is wrong. But a person who understand this theory, but did not modify the words of the theory is great. I am in such a problem.

The other is English. If you repeat a word of a professor ´what is wrong´. If you know the meaning of the word, I do not think it has a problem. Because nobody created a word. A single word spoken by a professor can be found everywhere. I was critcised for using words spoken by professors. It is not wrong as to me. Because I know the meaning of the words.

People also worry about ´plagiarism´. In principle you can cut and paste the statement of a scientist and cite. You are not wrong. if you do not cite you are wrong. University students are being confused by these things. In all places I stayed I have the habit of saying ´a person named ´E´ said like this. But I know what he said. What is wrong?. Such attempt of critcising students will result in lacking interest with time.

The other thing is ´critcising each other´. What is conceptual?. Nowadays people say there is oncept difference between different fields. I do not belief in this. For example, bring a biotechnologist and assign him in ecology and vice versa. Do you think they will perform in a subject they are not trained in?.

The other thing is abberivation and codes. Abberivations and codes are systematic way of reminding things. There is standard for abberivation and a person should use abberivation when needed. abberivation was created for the purpose of simplifying things. Indeed if you do not know what is your abberviation it is not wrong. I will give you a simple example. A person after understanding a complicated subject one to use a code to rememebr it because he found it not handy to recall the long statement.
There is nothing wrong as to me. The wrong thing is when a person is not able to know what the abberviation stands for.

I am also complaining about talking alone. University students can talk alone. What is wrong?. If you know what you are talking about there is nothing problem with that. Some people by keeping quiet they think that they are great. Nothing is a symbol of intelligence as long it is your best way.

This tells us we will be in a wrong direction in field evaluation.

(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')
Are you an engineering student?

Your writing is absolutely horrible! Good luck in the real world.

(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')
holy shit dude, what are you writing
(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')


(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')
poor forien guy
(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')
LOLLLL. Dude is lecturing himself.
(in reply to: Reminding by 'hard')
LOL! the OP is GOLD!!

Must be a York engineering student!


Canadian Universities Forum at Canada City Web Site | Start Home Based Business in Canada | Canadian and International FLP Business