Oooooooooh pain
I hate this. This is exactly why I don't usually work ahead. It wastes time.
I spent about 8 hours or so working on my tax project before today, the night before. Over the weekend, I received an email from the professor that caused me to realize an early oversight basically makes everything I did wrong. I did not make an inquiry.
I have to start from square one on the night before. That means the majority if not all of that 8 hours was wasted. I am extremely keen on efficiency, especially in the school setting. Because of this, I am extremely frustrated right now, but also anxious.
Despite numerous efforts to change my ways, I'm once again trapped the night before the project is due. On top of that, the test is tomorrow. I also planned to study for this and have somewhat already, but the project just pinned me down. I'm going to have to do 80% of a project and study for the test and take the test in 1 day.
If that's how things are going to be, I want my 8 hours back. By the way, how do other people avoid the aforementioned "loss" of 8 hours? Do they just take those, often realizing that they studied improperly or focused on unnecessary content? Do they also fix projects after going further in the class teaches them they did it wrong?
I conclude that there is a GOOD REASON that I have tended towards procrastination when given an option. It's EFFICIENT. I don't have to sit there wondering what the hell I should do. I have all the information I need. Information that is essentially with-held (since you basically wouldn't know what to ask for before it's given) until late in the game. In classes structured in this way, it is an insult to students to expect them to attempt work early. It wastes time! School should never be about wasting time. If you're going to give us the information we need at a later date, don't ask us/suggest to start the project early!!!!
Even in tests, the most efficient study time is only after the last class before the test. Before then, you do not have 100% of the tested information and can not compile the ideal study plan. In many ways, the current system is sub-par. Before I become a teacher, I am going to reflect on this and find a better method of information delivery for retention. Bit-by-bit studying is not conducive to passing a test when compared to studying for it in aggregate fashion. The only limitation on this is the amount of material one can cover in that fashion.
Now for something interesting: What if there was a test/quiz after every single chapter or lesson instead of just 3 big tests? The teacher still issues a study guide every time, with emphasis on the most important part of the lecture. Then students are tested on it and move on. Does this sound too easy for students?
If you said yes, I DARE you to deliver to me a compelling argument as to why a person's retention this way would differ from that of someone who had only 2-3 tests if both waited a year afterwards.
Also, if this sounds like too much work for professors, I'm sure technology can lend a hand. Hell, this tax test is all multiple choice anyway, it can't be THAT hard to have a machine or TA go through a bunch of these every week. In the upper levels with less students, you can still use an essay or so (it's not like you're not lumping 3-4 essays onto 1 test later anyway, you'll still spend the time, even if you defer it).
The only difference between this and the current system is efficiency...the current system is less efficient! It forces students to work material of minimal import, OR work material twice because they forget details waiting for the test!
Doing shit twice is crap. What kids take away from class is the concept, not minute detail. Classes you took 3 years ago are perfect examples. You retain most of the concepts either way.
I spent about 8 hours or so working on my tax project before today, the night before. Over the weekend, I received an email from the professor that caused me to realize an early oversight basically makes everything I did wrong. I did not make an inquiry.
I have to start from square one on the night before. That means the majority if not all of that 8 hours was wasted. I am extremely keen on efficiency, especially in the school setting. Because of this, I am extremely frustrated right now, but also anxious.
Despite numerous efforts to change my ways, I'm once again trapped the night before the project is due. On top of that, the test is tomorrow. I also planned to study for this and have somewhat already, but the project just pinned me down. I'm going to have to do 80% of a project and study for the test and take the test in 1 day.
If that's how things are going to be, I want my 8 hours back. By the way, how do other people avoid the aforementioned "loss" of 8 hours? Do they just take those, often realizing that they studied improperly or focused on unnecessary content? Do they also fix projects after going further in the class teaches them they did it wrong?
I conclude that there is a GOOD REASON that I have tended towards procrastination when given an option. It's EFFICIENT. I don't have to sit there wondering what the hell I should do. I have all the information I need. Information that is essentially with-held (since you basically wouldn't know what to ask for before it's given) until late in the game. In classes structured in this way, it is an insult to students to expect them to attempt work early. It wastes time! School should never be about wasting time. If you're going to give us the information we need at a later date, don't ask us/suggest to start the project early!!!!
Even in tests, the most efficient study time is only after the last class before the test. Before then, you do not have 100% of the tested information and can not compile the ideal study plan. In many ways, the current system is sub-par. Before I become a teacher, I am going to reflect on this and find a better method of information delivery for retention. Bit-by-bit studying is not conducive to passing a test when compared to studying for it in aggregate fashion. The only limitation on this is the amount of material one can cover in that fashion.
Now for something interesting: What if there was a test/quiz after every single chapter or lesson instead of just 3 big tests? The teacher still issues a study guide every time, with emphasis on the most important part of the lecture. Then students are tested on it and move on. Does this sound too easy for students?
If you said yes, I DARE you to deliver to me a compelling argument as to why a person's retention this way would differ from that of someone who had only 2-3 tests if both waited a year afterwards.
Also, if this sounds like too much work for professors, I'm sure technology can lend a hand. Hell, this tax test is all multiple choice anyway, it can't be THAT hard to have a machine or TA go through a bunch of these every week. In the upper levels with less students, you can still use an essay or so (it's not like you're not lumping 3-4 essays onto 1 test later anyway, you'll still spend the time, even if you defer it).
The only difference between this and the current system is efficiency...the current system is less efficient! It forces students to work material of minimal import, OR work material twice because they forget details waiting for the test!
Doing shit twice is crap. What kids take away from class is the concept, not minute detail. Classes you took 3 years ago are perfect examples. You retain most of the concepts either way.