Re: over the edge
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:15 am
Wow, getting logged out ate my post. Frustrating! Once more, then...
Topazg: When I was thirteen my French teacher thought she would help her students out my putting a big poster that saidPRENDU by the blackboard. Guess how I conjugated prendre for the rest of the year? One of the common differences, in a number of fields, between people who know a subject well and those who can teach it well, is that the knowers think that (i) negative feedback works better than positive feedback, and specifically, (ii) identifying mistakes preemptively makes it impossible for people to make the mistake again. It's easy to feel this way when you know the material really well, and find it really exciting. If you know it less well or find it harder to focus on it, which is the situation many students are in, you are likely to remember that something was emphasized, without remembering that it was emphasized as a mistake.
There are different learning styles, of course, and sometimes an expert is writing specifically for an audience of peers, which tends to lead to the sort of writing where if you start in the middle it's impossible to tell whether the author is talking about a proposition he accepts or a mistake he rejects. This kind of approach is sometimes unavoidable, but it's an awful way to introduce someone to a subject; commonly, he'll read the book and get about half of what the author wrote backwards, because he remembers which subjects were emphasized, and probably some of the pros and cons, but not whether the author ultimately accepted or rejected it.
"Kage's Secrets Chronicles" has four games, right? If I just wanted to get good at playing black, I personally would stick to the pro-pro games. If I wanted ideas for how white can profit from passive play, I would look at the pro-ama games.
Cyclops: How extensively have you looked at this? I have hunches, but if you've already looked at a ton of games I don't want to spend an hour mucking around, reduplicating your research.
Topazg: When I was thirteen my French teacher thought she would help her students out my putting a big poster that said
There are different learning styles, of course, and sometimes an expert is writing specifically for an audience of peers, which tends to lead to the sort of writing where if you start in the middle it's impossible to tell whether the author is talking about a proposition he accepts or a mistake he rejects. This kind of approach is sometimes unavoidable, but it's an awful way to introduce someone to a subject; commonly, he'll read the book and get about half of what the author wrote backwards, because he remembers which subjects were emphasized, and probably some of the pros and cons, but not whether the author ultimately accepted or rejected it.
"Kage's Secrets Chronicles" has four games, right? If I just wanted to get good at playing black, I personally would stick to the pro-pro games. If I wanted ideas for how white can profit from passive play, I would look at the pro-ama games.
Cyclops: How extensively have you looked at this? I have hunches, but if you've already looked at a ton of games I don't want to spend an hour mucking around, reduplicating your research.
