4 ms·

> Many of them are neurodivergent who do miserably in exam conditions Isn't this part of life? Learning to excel anyway?

JoshTriplett 1y ago
Life doesn't tend to take place under exam conditions, either.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  The important parts of life (like interviews) do.
  - JoshTriplett 1y ago
    > The important parts of life (like interviews) Interviews shouldn't be "exam conditions" either. See the ten thousand different articles that regularly show up here about why not to do the "invert a binary tree on a whiteboard" style of interview. There are much better ways to figure out people's skills. And much better things to be using in-person interview time on.
    - ecb_penguin 1y ago
      You're confusing the way things are with the way things ought to be. The reality is life is full of time boxed challenges.
      - JoshTriplett 1y ago
        Other than a subset of interviews, what do you have in mind that has a structure similar to an exam? Because I'd agree with the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44106325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44106325 .
        ecb_penguin 1y ago
        > what do you have in mind that has a structure similar to an exam? All of life! An exam is a time boxed challenge. Sometimes it's open notes, sometimes it's not. I've had exams where I have to write an essay, and I've had exams where I've had to solve math problems. All things I've had to do in high pressure situations in my job. Solving problems with no help and a clock ticking happens a million times per day. We even assign grades in life, like "meets expectations" and "does not meet expectations". Even still, you missed the point of my comment. You keep focusing on how interviews should be done, not how they're conducted in reality.
        JoshTriplett 1y ago
        I understood the point of your comment; I disagreed with it. I think there's a meaningful distinction between high-pressure situations at work and exams in school, sufficiently so that the latter is poor preparation for the former. More to the point, everyone is subjected to the latter, while "thrives under pressure" is not a universal quality everyone is expected to have or use. It's a useful skill, and it's more useful to have than to not have, but the same can be said of a thousand skills, and many of them are things I'd prioritize higher in a colleague or employee, given the choice.
        ecb_penguin 1y ago
        > I think there's a meaningful distinction between high-pressure situations at work and exams in school Sure, in school there is no real consequence. That's why it's important. School exams are orders of magnitude easier than the real world. > "thrives under pressure" is not a universal quality everyone is expected to have or use School isn't intended to imbue everyone with universal qualities. Some people will excel and some wont. The ones that excel will go on to work in situations where you must thrive under pressure. > It's a useful skill, and it's more useful to have than to not have, but the same can be said of a thousand skills This is a different discussions then.
        JoshTriplett 1y ago
  - alabastervlog 1y ago
    It’s really just interviews, and even those are nothing like any exam I’ve ever taken. They’re closest, in terms of the kind of stress and the skills required to look good, to some kind of solo public speaking performance. … which most people come out of 17+ years of school having done very little of, with basically a phobia of it, and being awful at it. They are probably something like oral exams that a few universities use heavily, or the teaching practices of many elite prep schools. [edit] oh and interviews in most industries aren’t like that. Tech is especially grueling in the interview phase.
- crystal_revenge 1y ago
  I believe parent is making a more general point, and as someone who would also be considered "neurodivergent" I would agree with that point. There were plenty of times growing up where special consideration would have been a huge help for me, but I'm deeply grateful that I learned in a world where "sometimes life is unfair" was considered a valuable lesson. In my adult life I had a coworker who constantly demanded that she be given special consideration in the work environment: more time to complete tasks, not working with coworkers who moved too quickly, etc. She was capable but refused to recognize that even if you have to do things in a way that don't work for you, sometimes you either have to succeed that way or find something else to do. Today she's homeless living out of her car, but still demands to that be hired she needs to be allowed to work as slowly as she needs and that she will need special consideration to help her complete daily tasks etc. We recently lived through an age of incredible prosperity, but that age is wrapping up and competition is heating up everywhere. When things are great, there is enough for everyone, but right now I know top performers that don't need special consideration when doing their job struggling to find work. In this world if you learned to always get by with some extra help, you are going to be in for a very rude awakening. Had I grown up in the world as it has been the last decade I would have a much easier adolescence and a much harder adult life. I've learned to find ways to maximize my strengths as well as suck it up and just do it when I'm faced with challenges that target my weaknesses and areas I struggle. Life isn't fair, but I don't think the best way to prepare people for this is to try to make life more fair.
  - falcor84 1y ago
    I really like your take on this, but disagree with your conclusion. I do think that trying to "make life more fair" is essentially the main goal of civilization, codified as early (and probably much earlier) as The Code of Hammurabi. My take is that we need to tread a thin line such that we teach young people to accept that life is inherently unfair, while at the same time doing what we can as a society to make it more fair.
    - JoshTriplett 1y ago
      > My take is that we need to tread a thin line such that we teach young people to accept that life is inherently unfair, while at the same time doing what we can as a society to make it more fair. Agreed. Teaching that life is unfair (and how to succeed despite that) is an important lesson. But there's an object-meta distinction that's important to make there. Don't teach people that life is unfair by being unfair to them in their education and making them figure it out themselves. Teach a class on the topic and what they're likely to encounter in society, a couple times over the course of their education.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
  It's more about the meta-skill of learning to adapt. Learning to be uncomfortable sometimes.
  - kbelder 1y ago
    Right. The hardest things you encounter in your life will not adapt themselves to make you more comfortable, so it's critical that you gain experience in doing things outside of your comfort zone. Getting stressed during an exam is nothing compared to some of the bumps life will throw at you. And it'll make you happier in the long run.
aaplok 1y ago
I don't think so? I teach maths, not survival or social pressure. If a student in my class is a competent mathematician why should they not be acknowledged to be that?
- baq 1y ago
  real life first, math second. taking tests is a skill that must be learned, especially now with AI faking quite literally everything that can be shown on a screen. (unless your students are learning purely for the joy of it and not for having a chance to get hired anywhere.)
  - LunaSea 1y ago
    > taking tests is a skill that must be learned Why? It's a useless skill that you will literally never have to use after your schooling.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - baq 1y ago
      and job interviews.
      - LunaSea 1y ago
        Depends on the type of interview I guess. If the company asks leet code problems, I guess they are making the same mistake as schools do.
  - razakel 1y ago
    >taking tests is a skill that must be learned "I had to suffer so you must too."
    - baq 1y ago
      "I'm hiring and want to see if his resume checks out"

JoshTriplett 1y ago

Life doesn't tend to take place under exam conditions, either.

Aeolun 1y ago
The important parts of life (like interviews) do.
- JoshTriplett 1y ago
  > The important parts of life (like interviews) Interviews shouldn't be "exam conditions" either. See the ten thousand different articles that regularly show up here about why not to do the "invert a binary tree on a whiteboard" style of interview. There are much better ways to figure out people's skills. And much better things to be using in-person interview time on.
  - ecb_penguin 1y ago
    You're confusing the way things are with the way things ought to be. The reality is life is full of time boxed challenges.
    - JoshTriplett 1y ago
      Other than a subset of interviews, what do you have in mind that has a structure similar to an exam? Because I'd agree with the comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44106325 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44106325 .
      - ecb_penguin 1y ago
        > what do you have in mind that has a structure similar to an exam? All of life! An exam is a time boxed challenge. Sometimes it's open notes, sometimes it's not. I've had exams where I have to write an essay, and I've had exams where I've had to solve math problems. All things I've had to do in high pressure situations in my job. Solving problems with no help and a clock ticking happens a million times per day. We even assign grades in life, like "meets expectations" and "does not meet expectations". Even still, you missed the point of my comment. You keep focusing on how interviews should be done, not how they're conducted in reality.
        JoshTriplett 1y ago
        I understood the point of your comment; I disagreed with it. I think there's a meaningful distinction between high-pressure situations at work and exams in school, sufficiently so that the latter is poor preparation for the former. More to the point, everyone is subjected to the latter, while "thrives under pressure" is not a universal quality everyone is expected to have or use. It's a useful skill, and it's more useful to have than to not have, but the same can be said of a thousand skills, and many of them are things I'd prioritize higher in a colleague or employee, given the choice.
        ecb_penguin 1y ago
        > I think there's a meaningful distinction between high-pressure situations at work and exams in school Sure, in school there is no real consequence. That's why it's important. School exams are orders of magnitude easier than the real world. > "thrives under pressure" is not a universal quality everyone is expected to have or use School isn't intended to imbue everyone with universal qualities. Some people will excel and some wont. The ones that excel will go on to work in situations where you must thrive under pressure. > It's a useful skill, and it's more useful to have than to not have, but the same can be said of a thousand skills This is a different discussions then.
        JoshTriplett 1y ago
- alabastervlog 1y ago
  It’s really just interviews, and even those are nothing like any exam I’ve ever taken. They’re closest, in terms of the kind of stress and the skills required to look good, to some kind of solo public speaking performance. … which most people come out of 17+ years of school having done very little of, with basically a phobia of it, and being awful at it. They are probably something like oral exams that a few universities use heavily, or the teaching practices of many elite prep schools. [edit] oh and interviews in most industries aren’t like that. Tech is especially grueling in the interview phase.
crystal_revenge 1y ago
I believe parent is making a more general point, and as someone who would also be considered "neurodivergent" I would agree with that point. There were plenty of times growing up where special consideration would have been a huge help for me, but I'm deeply grateful that I learned in a world where "sometimes life is unfair" was considered a valuable lesson. In my adult life I had a coworker who constantly demanded that she be given special consideration in the work environment: more time to complete tasks, not working with coworkers who moved too quickly, etc. She was capable but refused to recognize that even if you have to do things in a way that don't work for you, sometimes you either have to succeed that way or find something else to do. Today she's homeless living out of her car, but still demands to that be hired she needs to be allowed to work as slowly as she needs and that she will need special consideration to help her complete daily tasks etc. We recently lived through an age of incredible prosperity, but that age is wrapping up and competition is heating up everywhere. When things are great, there is enough for everyone, but right now I know top performers that don't need special consideration when doing their job struggling to find work. In this world if you learned to always get by with some extra help, you are going to be in for a very rude awakening. Had I grown up in the world as it has been the last decade I would have a much easier adolescence and a much harder adult life. I've learned to find ways to maximize my strengths as well as suck it up and just do it when I'm faced with challenges that target my weaknesses and areas I struggle. Life isn't fair, but I don't think the best way to prepare people for this is to try to make life more fair.
- falcor84 1y ago
  I really like your take on this, but disagree with your conclusion. I do think that trying to "make life more fair" is essentially the main goal of civilization, codified as early (and probably much earlier) as The Code of Hammurabi. My take is that we need to tread a thin line such that we teach young people to accept that life is inherently unfair, while at the same time doing what we can as a society to make it more fair.
  - JoshTriplett 1y ago
    > My take is that we need to tread a thin line such that we teach young people to accept that life is inherently unfair, while at the same time doing what we can as a society to make it more fair. Agreed. Teaching that life is unfair (and how to succeed despite that) is an important lesson. But there's an object-meta distinction that's important to make there. Don't teach people that life is unfair by being unfair to them in their education and making them figure it out themselves. Teach a class on the topic and what they're likely to encounter in society, a couple times over the course of their education.
2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
It's more about the meta-skill of learning to adapt. Learning to be uncomfortable sometimes.
- kbelder 1y ago
  Right. The hardest things you encounter in your life will not adapt themselves to make you more comfortable, so it's critical that you gain experience in doing things outside of your comfort zone. Getting stressed during an exam is nothing compared to some of the bumps life will throw at you. And it'll make you happier in the long run.

aaplok 1y ago

I don't think so? I teach maths, not survival or social pressure. If a student in my class is a competent mathematician why should they not be acknowledged to be that?

baq 1y ago
real life first, math second. taking tests is a skill that must be learned, especially now with AI faking quite literally everything that can be shown on a screen. (unless your students are learning purely for the joy of it and not for having a chance to get hired anywhere.)
- LunaSea 1y ago
  > taking tests is a skill that must be learned Why? It's a useless skill that you will literally never have to use after your schooling.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - baq 1y ago
    and job interviews.
    - LunaSea 1y ago
      Depends on the type of interview I guess. If the company asks leet code problems, I guess they are making the same mistake as schools do.
- razakel 1y ago
  >taking tests is a skill that must be learned "I had to suffer so you must too."
  - baq 1y ago
    "I'm hiring and want to see if his resume checks out"