Great article on advice from Mike Rowe the "Dirty Jobs" guy
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/23/mike-rowe-of-dirty-jobs-speaks-about-hard-work-how-many-are-following-the-worst-advice-in-the-history-of-the-world/
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Energy jobs are a big, growing field
USA has a profile of energy jobs. Many are spatial, kinesthetic, or both. Also, it mentions that many pay solid salaries in small-town areas where your money will go far.
Want a job? Look to the energy field - USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2012/09/30/energy-jobs-growing/1598801/
Want a job? Look to the energy field - USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2012/09/30/energy-jobs-growing/1598801/
Sunday, September 14, 2014
How to go to college and new workforce training initiatives
This article discusses a new push for workforce education in colleges, sorely needed. It mentions major funding for natural gas field work, definitely a hands-on job, and cybersecurity training.
In addition, the article mentions that having a mentor and an internship in college are two of the biggest predictors of later success. It is not where you go to college, it's how you go to college.
It takes a mentor
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/opinion/thomas-friedman-it-takes-a-mentor.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=0
In addition, the article mentions that having a mentor and an internship in college are two of the biggest predictors of later success. It is not where you go to college, it's how you go to college.
It takes a mentor
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/opinion/thomas-friedman-it-takes-a-mentor.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=0
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Is college a waste of money?
In this article by economist Robert Reich he makes a good point about how a vast array of technician jobs do not require a 4-year degree and are growing in the future.
Robert Reich: College is a ludicrous waste of money
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/03/robert_reich_college_is_a_ludicrous_waste_of_money_partner/
I disagree in part; college is definitely incredibly overpriced to the point of extortion, and often not applicable to real-world jobs. However, getting a liberal arts education at a reasonable price is a great idea just for life in general.
Getting a job should not be the goal of a liberal arts education. To me, it would be great to get a job skill first, then slowly get a liberal arts education after you're already making money. This model is essentially the same as joining the military: you do service while getting paid, and then they pay you even more to go to school. Today's GI bill is worth a couple years' salary.
Robert Reich: College is a ludicrous waste of money
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/03/robert_reich_college_is_a_ludicrous_waste_of_money_partner/
I disagree in part; college is definitely incredibly overpriced to the point of extortion, and often not applicable to real-world jobs. However, getting a liberal arts education at a reasonable price is a great idea just for life in general.
Getting a job should not be the goal of a liberal arts education. To me, it would be great to get a job skill first, then slowly get a liberal arts education after you're already making money. This model is essentially the same as joining the military: you do service while getting paid, and then they pay you even more to go to school. Today's GI bill is worth a couple years' salary.
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Did you think you were bad at math?
Did you think you were bad at math? Maybe it was the way you learned it.
Richard Rusczyk believes we teach math in a rote, uncreative way that does not offer practice and experience in creative problem solving.
http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/blog.php?u=1163
Richard Rusczyk believes we teach math in a rote, uncreative way that does not offer practice and experience in creative problem solving.
http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/blog.php?u=1163
Sunday, July 20, 2014
Feel like you "should" have chosen a great job? Not that simple
Feel like you "should" have chosen a great job from the time you were younger but missed out on the opportunity? Not that simple. You didn't necessarily "mess up."
"Economist Neil Howe says that only 5% of people pick the right job on the first try. He calls those people 'fast starters' and in general, they are less creative, less adventurous, and less innovative, which makes a conventional, common path work well for them. So it's questionable whether you should even aspire to be one of those people who picks right the first try."
Many people who really like their "job" or careers or lifestyles or whatever you want to call it stumbled into it.
Gilbert says you need to try stuff to see what will make you happy. Do that. It's scary, because it's hard to find out that what you thought would make you happy will not make you happy. But then, it's true that being a realist is not particularly useful to human evolution either.
These days we often overestimate how great other jobs are due to the hype surrounding them. We live in an age in which it is easy to create glossy marketing, put shiny pictures and a great website together about careers which often belie the true nature of the field. Colleges and training schools do this sort of glamour marketing constantly so that the tuition keeps rolling in.
Also, many jobs require schooling/training that was not offered to you or did not even exist while you were in college or 20-something trying to figure out what you wanted to be when you grew up.
For example, when I was in college in the 1990s, Earth Science or Enviornmental Science was unheard of at my school. "Green," "Eco-," "renewable," and "sustainable" were not buzzwords yet.
Also:
"Economist Neil Howe says that only 5% of people pick the right job on the first try. He calls those people "fast starters" and in general, they are less creative, less adventurous, and less innovative, which makes a conventional, common path work well for them. So it's questionable whether you should even aspire to be one of those people who picks right the first try."
Lifehacker - How to pick a career you actually like
http://lifehacker.com/5978475/how-to-pick-a-career-you-actually-like
"Economist Neil Howe says that only 5% of people pick the right job on the first try. He calls those people 'fast starters' and in general, they are less creative, less adventurous, and less innovative, which makes a conventional, common path work well for them. So it's questionable whether you should even aspire to be one of those people who picks right the first try."
Many people who really like their "job" or careers or lifestyles or whatever you want to call it stumbled into it.
Gilbert says you need to try stuff to see what will make you happy. Do that. It's scary, because it's hard to find out that what you thought would make you happy will not make you happy. But then, it's true that being a realist is not particularly useful to human evolution either.
These days we often overestimate how great other jobs are due to the hype surrounding them. We live in an age in which it is easy to create glossy marketing, put shiny pictures and a great website together about careers which often belie the true nature of the field. Colleges and training schools do this sort of glamour marketing constantly so that the tuition keeps rolling in.
Also, many jobs require schooling/training that was not offered to you or did not even exist while you were in college or 20-something trying to figure out what you wanted to be when you grew up.
For example, when I was in college in the 1990s, Earth Science or Enviornmental Science was unheard of at my school. "Green," "Eco-," "renewable," and "sustainable" were not buzzwords yet.
Also:
"Economist Neil Howe says that only 5% of people pick the right job on the first try. He calls those people "fast starters" and in general, they are less creative, less adventurous, and less innovative, which makes a conventional, common path work well for them. So it's questionable whether you should even aspire to be one of those people who picks right the first try."
Lifehacker - How to pick a career you actually like
http://lifehacker.com/5978475/how-to-pick-a-career-you-actually-like
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Monday, July 14, 2014
"Kodak" Larry Bird
Bill Simmons on the visual memory of Larry Bird:
"Bird and Magic went the other way — if they made their teammates better, it gave them a better chance to win. Like Jordan, they were basketball savants who possessed a supernatural feel for what should happen collectively on every play, as if they had already studied the play’s blueprint and come up with a plan of attack. Unlike Jordan, their genius was inclusive — just by playing with them day after day, their teammates started seeing the court like they did. Bird’s first Celtics coach, Bill Fitch, affectionately nicknamed Bird “Kodak,” explaining to a writer that Bird’s “mind is constantly taking pictures of the whole court.” You could have said that about Magic, too. That’s what made them such devastating passers; they always knew where every teammate would be.
"Bird and Magic went the other way — if they made their teammates better, it gave them a better chance to win. Like Jordan, they were basketball savants who possessed a supernatural feel for what should happen collectively on every play, as if they had already studied the play’s blueprint and come up with a plan of attack. Unlike Jordan, their genius was inclusive — just by playing with them day after day, their teammates started seeing the court like they did. Bird’s first Celtics coach, Bill Fitch, affectionately nicknamed Bird “Kodak,” explaining to a writer that Bird’s “mind is constantly taking pictures of the whole court.” You could have said that about Magic, too. That’s what made them such devastating passers; they always knew where every teammate would be.
And maybe it took a few years, but Bird and Magic parlayed that particular gift into something more meaningful. Bird learned how to fully harness “it” during the 1984-85 season; for Magic, “it” didn’t happen until two seasons later. And here’s what “it” is. Each guy could assess any basketball game — in the moment, on the fly — and determine exactly what his team needed."
from God Loves Cleveland
by Bill Simmons
http://grantland.com/features/god-loves-cleveland/
Friday, June 20, 2014
Spatial thinkers see spatial questions that others don't
Spatial thinkers see questions that others don't. People with high spatial or 3D intelligence naturally grasp a mental model of 3D objects and places (ex. engines, terrain, sculptures, sports maneuvers) and therefore spatial questions naturally occur to them.
Case in point: in my Physical Geography class we were talking about how the path of a missile appears on a map due to the Coriolis force, which causes long-distance flying objects and winds to appear to turn right in the northern hemisphere and left in the southern hemisphere. While a good chunk of the class was having trouble even seeing what the Coriolis force was (which admittedly is challenging for just about anyone because two motions are at work simultaneously, the missile and the earth), one guy asked how the path of the missile would change as it crossed the equator, since on one side missiles turn right whereas on other they turn left. The question occured to him because he had a solid grasp in his mind of the basic Coriolis effect in space, so that a further question popped out. However, for those who could not see the spatial dimensions in their mind in the first place this question would never occur to them, any more than, as Aristotle said, a blind man would talk about colors.
Einstein said he woud do visual experiments in his head rather than in a lab. This is how spatial 3D thinking works: because you can visualize things and hold the 3D model, you can then think about it and try things out to see what happens.
This idea is not rocket science; it applies to any intelligence. Musical people will see more musical questions, people high in linguistic intelligence will notice things about language that others don't. However, the basic truth is overlooked. If you notice that someone notices lots of questions about a certain field, they are likely high in the intelligence used in that field.
Case in point: in my Physical Geography class we were talking about how the path of a missile appears on a map due to the Coriolis force, which causes long-distance flying objects and winds to appear to turn right in the northern hemisphere and left in the southern hemisphere. While a good chunk of the class was having trouble even seeing what the Coriolis force was (which admittedly is challenging for just about anyone because two motions are at work simultaneously, the missile and the earth), one guy asked how the path of the missile would change as it crossed the equator, since on one side missiles turn right whereas on other they turn left. The question occured to him because he had a solid grasp in his mind of the basic Coriolis effect in space, so that a further question popped out. However, for those who could not see the spatial dimensions in their mind in the first place this question would never occur to them, any more than, as Aristotle said, a blind man would talk about colors.
Einstein said he woud do visual experiments in his head rather than in a lab. This is how spatial 3D thinking works: because you can visualize things and hold the 3D model, you can then think about it and try things out to see what happens.
This idea is not rocket science; it applies to any intelligence. Musical people will see more musical questions, people high in linguistic intelligence will notice things about language that others don't. However, the basic truth is overlooked. If you notice that someone notices lots of questions about a certain field, they are likely high in the intelligence used in that field.
Sunday, June 8, 2014
Working with kids = kinesthetic
Working with little kids = kinesthetic
Almost any job working with little kids is kinesthetic and tactile. Little kids are in a stage where they are learning to actually do things, whether kick a ball or use a pencil. Also because little kids are so small, there tends to be a lot more room to move around in a classroom, moving from place to place like the "reading corner."
Almost any job working with little kids is kinesthetic and tactile. Little kids are in a stage where they are learning to actually do things, whether kick a ball or use a pencil. Also because little kids are so small, there tends to be a lot more room to move around in a classroom, moving from place to place like the "reading corner."
Monday, February 3, 2014
Great books on kinesthetic, audial, and visual learning modes
Books on audial, visual, and kinesthetic learners
Key point: the learning modes are not exclusive; you can be high in one but not the other or high in both. One does not determine the other they are separate.
How Your Child Learns Best: Brain-Friendly Strategies You Can Use to Ignite Your Child's Learning and Increase School Success
by Judy Willis
This book is full of practical strategies for audial and visual learners. I have it and used it in Graduate School, it is not just for kids.
http://www.amazon.com/Your-Child-Learns-Best-Brain-Friendly/dp/1402213468/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391479094&sr=8-1&keywords=how+your+child+learns+best
Righting the Educational Conveyor Belt by Michael Grinder
This book is old but incredibly useful for real-life examples of how audial, visual, and tactile-kinesthetic learning play out in real situations.
http://www.amazon.com/Righting-Educational-Conveyor-Belt-Series/dp/1555520367/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391478897&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=righting+the+educatinoal+converyor+belot
This second book by Grinder has some crucial insights:
-He discusses the problem of translation -- missing information in class while your brain is converting one mode to the other. This is one of the biggest causes of failure in school.
-He notes that as children develop they go through different stages which each have a dominant mode:
elementary = kinesthetic and tactile age
middle school = audial mode
high school = visual mode
These development-stage modes exist apart from the child's own personal preference of modes.
He also notes that teachers at these ages tend to be dominant or at least high in the corresponding mode: middle school teachers tend to be audial, high school teachers more visual, and elementary teachers tactile-kinesthetic.
The secret to success: learning how to translate information into you mode, even if it takes extra time. If you can do this, then the mode of learning can no longer stand in your way.
Key point: the learning modes are not exclusive; you can be high in one but not the other or high in both. One does not determine the other they are separate.
How Your Child Learns Best: Brain-Friendly Strategies You Can Use to Ignite Your Child's Learning and Increase School Success
by Judy Willis
This book is full of practical strategies for audial and visual learners. I have it and used it in Graduate School, it is not just for kids.
http://www.amazon.com/Your-Child-Learns-Best-Brain-Friendly/dp/1402213468/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391479094&sr=8-1&keywords=how+your+child+learns+best
Righting the Educational Conveyor Belt by Michael Grinder
This book is old but incredibly useful for real-life examples of how audial, visual, and tactile-kinesthetic learning play out in real situations.
http://www.amazon.com/Righting-Educational-Conveyor-Belt-Series/dp/1555520367/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391478897&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=righting+the+educatinoal+converyor+belot
This second book by Grinder has some crucial insights:
-He discusses the problem of translation -- missing information in class while your brain is converting one mode to the other. This is one of the biggest causes of failure in school.
-He notes that as children develop they go through different stages which each have a dominant mode:
elementary = kinesthetic and tactile age
middle school = audial mode
high school = visual mode
These development-stage modes exist apart from the child's own personal preference of modes.
He also notes that teachers at these ages tend to be dominant or at least high in the corresponding mode: middle school teachers tend to be audial, high school teachers more visual, and elementary teachers tactile-kinesthetic.
The secret to success: learning how to translate information into you mode, even if it takes extra time. If you can do this, then the mode of learning can no longer stand in your way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)