4 ms·

I'll be honest, that article was written by someone not long out of college (me). In that situation, I'd say it's more true then, than when you get older and ha

I'll be honest, that article was written by someone not long out of college (me). In that situation, I'd say it's more true then, than when you get older and have a more experienced peer group. But of course, that more experienced peer group also tends to be much humbler and aware of their shortcomings as well, so I'd say the article still addresses that. The way it was meant to be brought back around to the nurse's situation was that, she actually was really good at what she was doing for her level of experience and progression through schooling, despite knowing that she had a long way left to go. As to what observable shortcomings other students had compared to her, I cannot say. I wasn't in the class or at work with her. The point was that her professors and supervisors, all of which gave her praise, were probably better able to see that than she was, given their experience and level of context within the field of nursing and teaching. The real issue, though, was in the cognitive dissonance between what she felt she was capable of and what others knew her to be capable of. This was an attempt to give at least some small explanation for that cognitive dissonance. It is possible to know more than anyone else about a given subject, and still know practically nothing about it compared to the amount of information about that subject contained within all of mankind or even the universe.

SilasX 13y ago
Thanks for taking the time to reply to these questions. >But of course, that more experienced peer group also tends to be much humbler and aware of their shortcomings as well, so I'd say the article still addresses that. I have to disagree: however humble they might be, someone on the projects I mentioned has to have a deep enough understanding to know how to handle the cornucopia of problems that can derail it: unexpected soil problems, dependencies not working like intended, aerodynamic lift not being as high as the model. I compare it to my understanding of long multiplication, which I've tested against students new to it. "How do you do it?" Here's how. Why is it done that way? Well it's an expansion of this formula. "Why in this order?" If you don't do it that way, you're actually multiplying these other numbers; you have to correct for it like so. "What if I forget some of the entries in the multiplication table?" Then here's how you multiply single digit numbers; here's multiplication as a version of addition. "What if I forget how to add?" Break out the number line, let's review. That kind of understanding is revealed in any large-scale, finished, working product. >The way it was meant to be brought back around to the nurse's situation was that, she actually was really good at what she was doing for her level of experience and progression through schooling, despite knowing that she had a long way left to go. As to what observable shortcomings other students had compared to her, I cannot say. Then I don't understand how this was supposed to reassure her; if I offered an explanation, I would test its implications against the rest of the scenario: is there a way overconfidence manifests in the typical student? Is she returning the (correct answer) "I'd have to ask someone" more often than the other students? As it stands, you've just listed something that might be consistent. Remember, the problem is not that "she was good for her level of experience"; the problem was that "she was called the best student they'd ever had". (I note with some irony that, for you claim to know general competence levels just after college is itself seemingly outside your knowns!)
- JangoSteve 13y ago
  > I have to disagree: however humble they might be, someone on the projects I mentioned has to have a deep enough understanding to know how to handle the cornucopia of problems that can derail it I agree with what you said, which is why I have a hard time understanding what exactly you disagree with. Are you saying that more experienced people tend to be less aware of their shortcomings? Or maybe we're taking humble to mean two different things? I'm using "humble" in the "not arrogant" sense, not the "feeling inferior" sense. I think you can be confident in your abilities while still being humble about them, and that's really what I meant by it when referring to the more experienced peer group. In fact, the most experienced people usually have an innate sense of confidence that allows them to avoid having to constantly tell people "I know what I'm doing". They don't have to tell people, because they can show it. That's the level of humbleness (or modesty may be a better word) that I was referring to. > Then I don't understand how this was supposed to reassure her; if I offered an explanation, I would test its implications against the rest of the scenario: That is generally the next step. You make observations, develop theories to explain the observations in a consistent manner, and then devise new tests to test those theories. This post was simply at the "developing a theory" step. > (I note with some irony that, for you claim to know general competence levels just after college is itself seemingly outside your knowns!) The irony is not lost on me. To be fair though, I didn't and still don't claim to "know" general competence levels, I just blogged my thoughts. Of course I could have littered my post with all sorts of qualifiers like "maybe", "perhaps", "sometimes", and "I think", but that doesn't make for effective writing. The post was not written or meant to be read in a vacuum. Context is important.
  - SilasX 13y ago
    >I agree with what you said, which is why I have a hard time understanding what exactly you disagree with The "No one knows what they're doing" bit. The people on those projects -- they know what they're doing.
    - JangoSteve 13y ago
      Oh. Yeah, it was really meant to be taken as "No one knows what they're doing [all or even most] of the time."

SilasX 13y ago

Thanks for taking the time to reply to these questions. >But of course, that more experienced peer group also tends to be much humbler and aware of their shortcomings as well, so I'd say the article still addresses that. I have to disagree: however humble they might be, someone on the projects I mentioned has to have a deep enough understanding to know how to handle the cornucopia of problems that can derail it: unexpected soil problems, dependencies not working like intended, aerodynamic lift not being as high as the model. I compare it to my understanding of long multiplication, which I've tested against students new to it. "How do you do it?" Here's how. Why is it done that way? Well it's an expansion of this formula. "Why in this order?" If you don't do it that way, you're actually multiplying these other numbers; you have to correct for it like so. "What if I forget some of the entries in the multiplication table?" Then here's how you multiply single digit numbers; here's multiplication as a version of addition. "What if I forget how to add?" Break out the number line, let's review. That kind of understanding is revealed in any large-scale, finished, working product. >The way it was meant to be brought back around to the nurse's situation was that, she actually was really good at what she was doing for her level of experience and progression through schooling, despite knowing that she had a long way left to go. As to what observable shortcomings other students had compared to her, I cannot say. Then I don't understand how this was supposed to reassure her; if I offered an explanation, I would test its implications against the rest of the scenario: is there a way overconfidence manifests in the typical student? Is she returning the (correct answer) "I'd have to ask someone" more often than the other students? As it stands, you've just listed something that might be consistent. Remember, the problem is not that "she was good for her level of experience"; the problem was that "she was called the best student they'd ever had". (I note with some irony that, for you claim to know general competence levels just after college is itself seemingly outside your knowns!)

JangoSteve 13y ago
> I have to disagree: however humble they might be, someone on the projects I mentioned has to have a deep enough understanding to know how to handle the cornucopia of problems that can derail it I agree with what you said, which is why I have a hard time understanding what exactly you disagree with. Are you saying that more experienced people tend to be less aware of their shortcomings? Or maybe we're taking humble to mean two different things? I'm using "humble" in the "not arrogant" sense, not the "feeling inferior" sense. I think you can be confident in your abilities while still being humble about them, and that's really what I meant by it when referring to the more experienced peer group. In fact, the most experienced people usually have an innate sense of confidence that allows them to avoid having to constantly tell people "I know what I'm doing". They don't have to tell people, because they can show it. That's the level of humbleness (or modesty may be a better word) that I was referring to. > Then I don't understand how this was supposed to reassure her; if I offered an explanation, I would test its implications against the rest of the scenario: That is generally the next step. You make observations, develop theories to explain the observations in a consistent manner, and then devise new tests to test those theories. This post was simply at the "developing a theory" step. > (I note with some irony that, for you claim to know general competence levels just after college is itself seemingly outside your knowns!) The irony is not lost on me. To be fair though, I didn't and still don't claim to "know" general competence levels, I just blogged my thoughts. Of course I could have littered my post with all sorts of qualifiers like "maybe", "perhaps", "sometimes", and "I think", but that doesn't make for effective writing. The post was not written or meant to be read in a vacuum. Context is important.
- SilasX 13y ago
  >I agree with what you said, which is why I have a hard time understanding what exactly you disagree with The "No one knows what they're doing" bit. The people on those projects -- they know what they're doing.
  - JangoSteve 13y ago
    Oh. Yeah, it was really meant to be taken as "No one knows what they're doing [all or even most] of the time."