Reddit mentions: The best higher & continuing education books

I'm actually french so i'm gonna try to give you a few tips but I won't have time to check for perfect grammar.

As a teacher :

1)Read https://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Design-Science-Pedagogical-Technology/dp/041580387X
I think this sums up and unifies a lots of "education theory" into one clear diagram called the conversational framework.

2)Learn how the learning process work at the brain level, memory, attention, how emotions play a role, the system 1 and system 2 ( http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/kahnemans-mind-clarifying-biases ), what is chunking, the role of repetition, the theory of flow.
Learn about the different types of intelligences, growth mindset, motivation and be able to explain all of these concepts to kids to teach them how to learn.

3)Encourage reading. Show that you read. Ask about their reading. This is so important.

4)You owe them to be strict. It's not bad, it's not jerky. They have to enter your class knowing that they won't have the choice but to work. Remind them that it's because it's your duty to give them the knowledge that will allow them to be free.
The school institution has to defend humanism values.

5)Teach them to act and talk differently in differents situations, as you do. Wich implies attitude and language. Wanting to have fun is normal, you can have conversation with them about a lots of things but teaching time is teaching time.

6)Be consistent and fair. If you say something do it. You don't punish them, they punish themselves by breaking the rules and jeez, you wish they hadn't and it disappoint you because you know they can act in a good way.
Separate the period when they can or can't talk, when they can or can't cooperate. Have a variety.

7)Don't allow being disrespected or making fun of in a mean way. Even if subtil or it could be misunderstood. Never be mean and always show that you care about them and they will respect you.

8)You don't know what's going on at home. Kids can have a really rough life. Talk with colleague and health staff if you see some kids having trouble.

9)Don't give too much homework, honestly a good attention in class and little work should be enough for most kids.

10)Learn to find good ressources. Every concept has been reasearched and there is good way to teach it our there. Your job is not to create everything from scratch, but to create the learning experience.

11)Be explicit with what they need to know. When you give a test, give details about what will be demanded from them. Don't grade to harsh or you're gonna discourage them, you have to some balance.


As a math teacher :

1)Always begin a lesson with a small exercise on the board that can be anything. Things they saw months ago, something that will help them understand the current lesson, mental calculation, etc.

2)Proportionnality is central to middle school. First year of middle school I don't do it as a separate chapter but use it all through the year. (organized in 6 parts : prices, length, angles, time, areas and volumes. it can cover all of the number/geometry concepts many times (we call it spiral progression in France).
Deep understanding of it take a long time but fonctionnal understanding is necessary and give them confidence.

3)Don't do a "addition" then a "substraction" then a "multiplication" or "division" chapter. How can they learn wich operation is to be used when they only practice one at a time.
Btw, use langage as a way to help them understand wich operation is at stake. (how many time this number can fit in this one?

4)At middle school level, teach them how to use at least three programs :
Geogebra for geometry
Scratch for programming and game
Excel or something

5)I began my carreer with printed lessons with words to fill. Now the "lesson part" is almost completely constructed with markers on the board by asking them what we're gonna write or do as much as possible. This teach them how to speak with rigour. This allow to talk about concepts more deeply. Yay btw you're a langage teacher too.
Teach them to be autonomous and remind them that you don't care what their lesson look like as long as all the infos are there, that it's clear, and that they'll be able to understand it.
We don't get to write that much these days as adults but I really think the paper and pen allow liberty of thought and should always be taught.
Keep the lessons short and straightforward.

You can give links to video or other ressources with the school program.

6)USB CAMERA.
You lose so much time by sending kids to the board to write down what they already did at their table for the class to see.
Take their notebook and show their work on the whiteboard.
Welcome error and don't judge it. Error is what allow you to learn. Make kids comment and explain the error and how to avoid it.
Don't have to use the shitty geometry board tool all the time. Use the same kind they use and show with the camera.


I didn't give you any advice about how to explain specific things but honestly there is many good ressources out there. Being a good teacher is more about teaching them how to learn and motivate them to do so.

Sometimes you can think they don't understand math but honestly
most of them would by giving some fucks. A kid that wants to succeed would with an average teacher, a kid that doesn't want to wouldn't learn with the best explanation cause he would'nt really pay active attention. So of course always focus on why math is useful. Try to make the learning experience as pleasant as necessary (can't always be the case.)

In some family the motivation come from the enviromnent, pressure and expectation from the parents, some kids don't have that chance. If you want them to succeed you should have high expectations for them.

You are right in that you only get one shot at UCL but you only need one. I did an EPQ and talked about it quite a lot. Mine was something like "do the benefits of stem cell research exceed the ethical complications" or something like that. It's something I'm really passionate about and I'm sure you won't struggle to keep talking about it. If your's is something you are interested in try an steer the conversation that way early. I don't know whether it was just by the time I did my UCL interview I was getting better at them or the nature of the interview but I felt like I controlled the direction of the conversation and lead it the way I wanted it to go, if you can try and do the same, if you can go in with a few points that you want to make and lead the conversation that way you will do well. Don't worry about silly questions, I'm afraid I'm from a preposterously privileged background and had enough interview practice to get someone in who had been lobotomised but I know most people are in your situation. Some of my friends who are much better people than I am are involved in a thing called target medicine, they go to schools like yours and do practice interviews and BMAT prep, it's worth finding out if they are at your school. I would say the main questions to be ready for are: why medicine, why UCL, possibly a tell me about yourself (I always hate that as it's almost impossible to tread the line of not underselling and not seeming arrogant.), Work experience (I had a few things and people I saw that had an impact on me and tried to talk about that rather than general things as it seemed more personal). Then obviously anything on your personal statement, go back through it and see what you would ask about or get someone else to do that for you, if want I can send you my email and I'll do it for you but you might find it more useful to do it with a teacher or someone else who knows you. Once you've done that just drill answers in your head, don't go through them entirely because it will sound scripted but have the phrases you want in your head and the ideas you want to express and know them like you would know material for an exam. I used this which was quite helpful and it's reassuring when you hear a question that you've already thought through. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Medical-Interviews-Questions-Analysed-Multiple-Mini-Interviews/dp/1905812051/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1421325700&sr=1-1&keywords=medical+school+interviews.

I also read ths but it wasn't as helful. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Medical-Ethics-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0192802828/ref=pd_sim_b_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1QZ21GB5NZE9YRJE84PN

That's about all I can think of at the moment but keep asking questions if you have any and I'll keep thinking about stuff. On the day try and keep relaxed as best as possible if you don't know what sort of person you are when you are afraid yet but you will know soon but most quiet people get chatty and chatty people go quiet. Some people will talk about all this stuff they've done, I don't know whether they do it to get into people's heads or to reassure themselves but ignore it. I met some really lovely people on my interview at UCL but there are a lot of arseclowns too, just let their crap wash over you and keep your head in as relaxed as space as possible and think about what you want to say. One last point is script links between your ideas, if you can go from why UCL or why medicine into other things like work experience or your job there make your last sentence leading. Don't think of it as them asking you questions, you can influence the questions they ask you. Of course you won't get 20 minutes perfectly moving from one thing to another under your control but doing it a bit will help your rhythm but don't fall into the trap of saying what you wanted to say next instead of answering their question. If they do blindside you don't say the first thing in your head, wait a few seconds, under that kind of pressure you think at a million miles an hour 3 seconds will feel like forever in your head because you are thinking so fast but you can use that time to think it through and say something sensible. I guess most of my advice is really on mentality largely because it's probably what I do best as you might guess from my username I'm a jump jockey in another life so I'm quite used to being in high pressure situations crapping myself with fear, so I have routines to put it to one side and relax which makes all the difference in the world. I can talk about that stuff if you are interested but I've always found it a very personal thing and what works for me may well not help you and it takes time to do well which you might find better spent on other things. Good luck with it all and remember that even the people the other-side of the table where in your position once and just see them as no different from you just further down the line. If it doesn't happen this year almost everyone else will consider you next year so don't build it up into a do or die thing in your head and good luck.

u/ExpressNess I think Communication Studies is a fun minor to have if you are looking to use computer science to create positive change in society or communicate better with people. It's a lot valuable life-skills, work/life relationship skills, ethical reasoning skills, and soft-skills that non-programming Computer Science classes try to teach and just aren't able to teach effectively. I personally only know 3 other people in Computer Science actively pursuing it. Here's my experience:

Comm Theory is definitely a harder class in my opinion (it's a pre-req) because of memorization and if you aren't used to studying human communication and relationships, but it's definitely valuable in learning. A lot of things seem like common sense but they are based on different theories.

Textbook: https://www.amazon.com/First-Communication-Theory-Conversations-Theorists-ebook/dp/B00VF61QTC/ref=sr_1_3?crid=238JE3CAIS2CI&keywords=communication+communication+communication&qid=1554518401&s=books&sprefix=communication+communication+comm%2Cstripbooks%2C210&sr=1-3

Beyond that class, there's a lot of cool opportunities and fun and useful classes.

I already had public speaking out of the way coming to UNC Charlotte and took COMM 2102 - Advanced Public Speaking to enhance my public speaking abilities since I do a lot of workshops and talks in tech. I've learned so many other ways to give speeches that I've never have thought about. It's gotten me skills to be confident enough to write an outline and practice a speech to submit for a TED talk. Also, I learned a bit of voice acting.

COMM-3120 Mass Media was fun! I took it with Prof. Tim Horne online and basically watched a lot of Netflix and wrote about how media and tech shapes manipulation of our reality. If anything, I learned a lot of skills to spot fake news if I daresay.

COMM-3136 Leadership, and Service with Adam Burden was amazing. Got to do volunteering work and meet a lot of student leaders on campus and learn about leading a team. The things I've learned in that class has helped me in a lot of group projects and I learned a lot on my personal strengths and values when working in teams and organizations. There's a service project which is just group volunteering which does help you with your soft-skills on your resume. It's based on relational leadership:

This is an awesome textbook that's used for that class: https://www.amazon.com/Exploring-Leadership-College-Students-Difference/dp/1118399471

There also a lot about the process of being inclusive and empowering others purposefully and ethically which a lot of tech companies are looking at as it's generally a problem in the tech industry.

Global Media - You learn a lot of views of the whole world and how technology effects culture and vice versa. It really opens up on a lot of ethical perspectives on how tech and media effects democracy and marginalized communities. Really, I think it the class should be called "Working towards achieving world peace through emerging tech, civilizations, media, and economies" tbh. Also, the professor is famous, worked for the United Nations, and wrote the textbook.

Textbook: https://www.amazon.com/Citizenship-Democracies-Engagement-Marginalized-Communities-ebook/dp/B075R3YXJ2/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=democracy+marginalized+economies&qid=1554517749&s=books&sr=1-1

For a related LBST 2102 Global Connections class, I'd also recommend taking Language, Media, and Peace with Prof. Jillian Wagner at the same time with Global Media or Mass Media if possible. This class is similar but focuses on the power of language and peace.

There's also Interpersonal Communications, Group Communications, etc...

Come now, I'm trying to engage you. Like this entire time.

ALL I SAID WAS HAVE SKILLS THAT CAN MAKE YOU STABLE AND HELP YOU HAVE A DAYJOB SO YOU CAN WORK ON YOUR DREAMS IN STABILITY.

Like I said that four times or something like that.

Over and over again.

Have skills people will pay for. Make sure you don't hate those skills but you don't have to have a passion for it. Work on your fun thing. It's unlikely to be the next Beatles because there's not enough brain space, but if it makes you happy, hobbies are great!

Somehow that came out

>NOBODY SHOULD EVER BE HAPPY. ALL ARE SLAVES!

Or something. I'm not sure how I could be more clear.

Anyone I know I haven't cited much here's an info dumb

http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Stagnation-Low-Hanging-ebook/dp/B004H0M8QS Tyler Cowen is one of the World's best most sober economists. You should fall in love with him (even if he sounds autistic)

http://www.amazon.com/Race-Against-The-Machine-ebook/dp/B005WTR4ZI

Machines might be becoming substitutes instead of completments. This could cause problems even if we were socialists. We have no idea how to handle that

http://lesswrong.com/lw/4su/how_to_be_happy/ All the best happiness research in one post

http://www.amazon.com/Worthless-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1334194677&sr=1-1 A good book about the economics of college degrees

http://www.amazon.com/The-Happiness-Hypothesis-Finding-ebook/dp/B003E749TE/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1334194701&sr=1-1-spell

Jonathan Haidt is sexy and cool and also a psychologist.

http://www.paulgraham.com/love.html How to do what you love only also be practical and not ruin your life.

http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html How to get fuck you money if you can identify a good start up and work that hard. (also finance

http://www.amazon.com/The-Black-Swan-Improbable-ebook/dp/B00139XTG4/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1334194849&sr=1-1 Why all the advantages of artists go to a few while most are forgotten because they have trouble finding a fanbase

http://www.amazon.com/The-Consolations-Philosophy-Alain-Botton/dp/0679779175/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334194919&sr=1-3 How Ethical Philosophy can help with not having your favorite external circumstances.

Why modern therapy owes much of it's usefully to ideas generated by old greeks

http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Cognitive-Behavioural-Therapy-Psychotherapy-ebook/dp/B005TQU5KA/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334194962&sr=1-1

So yea, I hope that made up for claims you find spurious.

Here is some advice with a degree of seriousness.

• Buy a high quality laptop: I bought a budget device only to regret it all the while. The price you pay for a device which is going to be ubiquitous in your college experience is a small one, if you look at the entire cost of college.
  
  
• Really ponder about your major. I can't tell you what a small fraction of students actually know the fundamental nature of their major until well into their coursework. If you can visit campus, they have many many different books which draw up an outline of what exactly you are going to be studying. If you live nearby, try visiting the college and see for yourself the nature of the various departments. Switching majors early into college is easy.
  
  
• Read college advice books. some would disagree here, but I see no reason is repeating the same mistakes made by thousands of college students before them. There are a thousands things that I would change about my college experience, but I did the best I could as I went in completely blind. I would recommend some books to incoming freshmen.
  
  

1. The Freshman Survival Guide
   
   
2. Been There, Should've Done That
   
   
3. Procrastination was my biggest issue in college. It is only now (well after graduation) that I realize the importance of a proper system of productivity. The best book I can recommend is Getting Things Done - by David Allen. This isn't some cheesy, feel good self help book. This a solid methodology to address productivity in everyday life. If you implement the method even to a small degree, you will have an incredible amount of benefit in your college life.
   
   

• Get yourself in shape: The college experience has a lot to do with meeting and interacting with people. Your choice of major is definitely a handicap right from the start. But you can help yourself by keeping yourself in good physical condition. And mind you, fitness is a lot more than just vanity.
  
  
• Familiarize yourself with support systems. This applies when you get to the end of your summer. UIUC is literally filled with hundreds of departments, all of them there to help you. Be it health, academics, housing or anything else, there are people who give valuable advice. Because I went in blind, it took a while for me to find my bearing around all these support systems. The Counseling Center is an excellent resource that every freshman should make use of.
  
  
• Thank your High School teachers: If you are amongst the group of people who had a fulfilling high school experience, make sure to thank those who made it possible. Have lunch with your favourite teacher/coach. Tell them how you are thankful for their contributions. Believe me, my mom's a teacher. It'll mean a lot to them. I know it will be hard for you to understand this, but the predominant majority of your friends from high-school will become irrelevant in you life through college. So make sure you don't forget the people who really matter like family, teachers and community leaders.
  
  
• Learn something different: You'll have the entire 3-4 years to learn things in your major. So take time out to learn new skills, that have nothing to do with your major. Welding, dancing, painting, photography, etc. Exploring interests is something that you won't have time for later on in life. So make best use of it when you can.
  
  
• Finally, relax! College is going to be a blast. An experience you have no idea of at the moment. So there is little point in worrying about it. Don't get all up in your head and worry about the future. You are going to fall, over and over again. But you will also learn how to pick yourself up, and that is what is going to make a real individual out of you.So savour those things which you will soon start to miss. Explore your hometown, eat at your favourite local restaurant, go on a road trip with friends, spend time with family. Enjoy!

I'd like to second the "facilitator" advice by /u/keepingthecommontone . When I teach outside of my comfort zone, I think of myself as an older brother figure, rather than a master Yoda kind of figure. Like, hey kids, we are in it together. Our goal is to make sense of it. I'll assign you homework, but then I'll do it at home the same way you do it, reading the readings, trying the problems etc. And then we'll meet and discuss our progress.

Because I am more experienced, I usually get further into the topic than they do, but not that much further. And invariably, some students have more experience in some subtopics, and help us all out. Which is normal; that's how it happens in life, so there's nothing wrong with it happening in the classroom.

And if I don't know an answer to a question, I either take it as an additional homework for myself (if I feel that I can probably do it easily), or ask everyone to give it a look if they are interested. If the question is cool, sometimes it can spark a lively conversation next class period. Especially if I was not the only one looking it up.

I actually love teaching like that, and now I deliberately design all my upper-college seminars like that. I just pick a topic that I don't know, but want to learn, and we learn it together. It works really great, and it is lots of fun. So far I never taught same 400-level seminar twice.

To sum up, I think you have a great opportunity here, and some great, potentially very fruitful situation brewing. Just embrace it, and go with the flow.

Also, here's a link to my favorite book on this very topic: Teaching what you don't know, by THerese Huston. It's a short and lovely book, very well written, specifically about teaching outside of your comfort zone. Good luck!

Unpaid internships are essentially slave labor, or at least indentured servitude. That's a terrible idea.

I'm not sure what you would describe as your dreams, so I'll give you a possible alternative track for a possible set of goals that may or may not coincide with yours.

Let's say your goal is to get a well paying job and have a reasonably deep understanding of physics. Perhaps you'd also like that job to be intellectually stimulating. Here's a rough outline of what you could do to accomplish that:

-------------------------------------------
Before college

You're in 7th grade. First step, use this collection of links on efficient study habits to destroy and master your school work (check out Anki, too). At minimum, treat school like a day job. (Hopefully you'll have great teachers that teach you a love of learning and a value for a well-rounded educational base that includes the sciences, arts, and humanities.) Do all the exercises from Khan Academy from the beginning to fill any gaps in your knowledge and use sites like PatrickJMT, Paul's Online Math Notes, BetterExplained, and MIT OCW Scholar to supplement school and KA. Also, read these two books.

Once you've got school under control and are getting the most of what's available to you through that avenue, use the Art of Problem Solving Books to get a vastly deeper understanding of precollege mathematics. I'd say it should be a higher priority than learning calculus early in terms of ROI, but you can learn it if you want to.

See if you can find a group near you to train for a Math Olympiad or similar competition (like the ones listed on AoPS). Aim for the gold, but realize that it's unlikely and the real prize is how the training will bring up your mathematical maturity so you can tackle evermore challenging problems, concepts, and subjects.

Also, use sites like Coursera, edx, and Udacity to teach yourself programming. Once you've got a reasonable handle on programming, check out a site like Topcoder and maybe try to compete in the Coding Olympiad. Also, mess around with a Raspberry Pi.

You could also check out any big research universities or even decent state schools in your area. They often have youth outreach like summer camps for kids who love math to come and learn things not usually taught in schools. You could also see if there are any researchers willing to take on a hard working and science-loving high school student for a research project (this is how most of the winners of Intel science competitions get their start).

------------------------------------------------------
College (Undergrad)

If you've done the first paragraph of the previous section alone, you should be able to get into any top 20 program in the country without any trouble. Chances are you'll be competitive for most Ivies and top 10 programs. Do any of the stuff beyond the first paragraph, and you'll be a shoe-in with a huge advantage over the overwhelming majority of college applicants in the country. The link about scholarships in my earlier comment will guarantee that you get a free ride. Also, read this book.

So now you want job security and financial security. Any sort of engineering would do, but I think you'd be more interested in computer science so let's say you do that and double major in physics.

Every summer you do paid internships for CS at various software firms for work experience. This will be the best way to make sure you are extremely hireable after graduation for lucrative positions with interesting work as a software engineer. That's Plan B.

For physics, you find a lab that does interesting work and start doing undergraduate research. You might change labs a few times to find a better fit. You might stick with the first one until graduation. Doesn't really matter as long as you gain real research experience.

You also study your ass of for the Physics GRE from your first semester. A few hours per week you do problems from old tests from subjects as you learn them. As in, do mechanics problems your first semester, do mechanics and E&M problems your second semester, do mechanics and E&M and thermo and optics problems your third semester, etc. (This may be different depending on how your school organizes its physics curriculum.)

You talk to your advisors and grad students and fellow students and professors about applying to grants and graduate school. They'll be able to give you actual advice tailored to your situation.

Either in the spring of your junior year or the fall of your senior year, you take the GREs and apply to graduate programs in areas that interest you and apply to grants to fund you and wait for the offers to return. Assuming you've followed my advice, at least some of them will contain acceptance letters with details of stipends. More than likely all the acceptance letters will include stipends you can live off of.

If you just get rejected, you'll at least have a BS-worth of physics knowledge and have experienced real research and can go off and enjoy your well-paid life solving interesting problems as a software engineer.

Or you can try and get a job at a national lab somewhere putting your physics background and programming chops to work and just apply again another year while saving up more money.

And all of this was debt free because you had the forsight in high school to apply to hundreds of scholarships.

------------------------------

Also, read this thread on what it takes to kick ass at MIT. The post and the ensuing discussion should drive home what you could train yourself to become. (I think the reply by the twin is particularly enlightening.)

You can either shoot for the stars and hit the moon, or you can read magazine articles about gravity on the moon.

Some reading suggestions first, to address questions about having serious, meaningful conversations about any subject matters at all:

Daniel Willingham website: free articles and videos. "Today, all of his research concerns the application of cognitive psychology to K-16 education. He writes the “Ask the Cognitive Scientist” column for American Educator magazine, and is an Associate Editor of Mind, Brain, and Education. He is also the author of Why Don't Students Like School? (Jossey-Bass) and When Can You Trust the Experts? (Jossey-Bass). His writing on education has been translated into eleven languages."

Clueless in Academe: How Schooling Obscures the Life of the Mind by Gerald Graff.

They Say, I Say by Gerald Graff.

My suggestions:

Here are my worries: all these bells and whistles will become a distraction. iPads will become less of an educational tool and more of a gimmick. My students won't pay attention because of their shiny objects.

First of all, if they're from wealthy backgrounds, these probably aren't going to be shiny new tech to them.

I'm teaching in a predominantly low-income, rural school which, 2 years ago, opened a brand new high school with 1-to-1 laptops for every student. We are talking about kids living in sheds as homes here, suddenly having access to the internet (at school and hotspots throughout the community) and their own computers to carry around!

Just remember this: you control and develop the policy and procedure for technology in the classroom. In my classroom I've developed the policy that the moment students walk in the door they open their laptops, access our class website and read the objectives for the day, then close their laptops and position them in the upper left-hand corner of their desks exactly 5 minutes after the tardy bell, ready to use if needed. I trained them to do this for about the first 2 weeks, then retrained and "speed tested" periodically throughout the year. They took to it like fish to water. Teens are great that way.

I'm a 22-year-old, fresh-out-of-college male who is also worried about finding the middle ground between being the "cool" teacher whom everyone likes and being respected.

Don't try to be either one. You will fail. I had a young colleague who tried to be "relevant" and funny by constantly using catch-phrases, slang and one-liners that were popular at the time. In effect, she tried to be a classroom comedian that everyone knew was stealing from real comedians. It was cringe-worthy.

You're 22. You're OLD. (For perspective, I'm 40...I should practically be in the grave by now, to my students.) You don't try to be cool, you just are (or will become so) because you will rely on your own personality for humor, and you will have your shit together (policy, procedure, etc.) and that's what they will respect.

I have a tendency to be a stickler about regulations because I have learned in my all-boys high school that discipline is essential. Lateness was never appreciated—both in terms of attending class and turning in assignments. An assignment being three days late without an appropriate excuse (pretty much medical reasons or domestic situations) was automatically given a failing grade. How do I not be a stickler?

What's wrong with being a stickler? There's a line in the movie Lean On Me delivered by Morgan Freeman which is something like "Discipline is not the enemy of enthusiasm." Explain it, expect it, enforce it.

How do I engage my students without making an ass of myself by using cheesy things? How do I engage them in serious discussions about Dickens without having to rely on pop culture too much?

See recommended reading.

Do I follow the "No Smiling" rule?

No. When you smile and greet students at the door, your smile should be warm, but professional. I also suggest a directive, until students know classroom procedure for entering and beginning the class.

I am female, so I use a warm but not overly-familiar "Good morning! Welcome. Please take a worksheet from the side-table and begin working." I smile and move on to the next student coming in. Later in the year I will use more personal greetings once I get to know the students.

The coach next door to me doesn't smile at all. But he has a great, booming voice. "Mornin'! Grab a worksheet and start on numbers 1-3."

The coach across the hall from me doesn't smile but has a pleasant expression and says "How are you? Pull your pants up. You need a pencil today?"

Everyone has their own way of greeting, but everyone is warm and friendly. You may be the very first person that day, even if it's 9th period, that has said something nice to that kid.

Do I focus on school as a place of serious business or make it fun?

School is a place of serious business where humor is applied when necessary, much like any job. If your goal is "edutainment" then you will work much harder trying to make everything entertaining to everybody. If you recognize that humor and fun are not something to strive for, but that they happen when they need to, you'll do fine.

Best of luck to you.

No, it looks the same.

The hashes format the heading. Because you've deleted the word 'blurb' and pasted your actual blurb, it's put it all in the heading format.

Copy and paste the following:

Education | College Guide| 46 Pages |June 17, 2016 | $9.99

Blurb

<br />
A detailed but concise guide to finding and obtaining scholarships. Devon Coombs graduated Magna Cum Laude from California State University, Northridge’s Accountancy and Business Honors programs. While at CSUN, he earned the University Scholarship, the Thomas C. Bloch Achievement Scholarship, the Noski Family Scholarship, the Torchbearer Award, and the Outstanding Graduating Senior Award, among many other awards and scholarships. In this book, he writes about the process he used to obtain over $40,000 in awards and scholarships. He also includes information directly from University Scholarship Committees. Included with the purchase of this book are supplementary video lectures, found at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbUTI0_011OiffB_FFU-ptQ. Devon has mentored many students through financial aid and scholarship processes. This book is a strong resource for people looking to minimize their college expenses.<br />
<br />
##A note from the author<br />
<br />
CHANGE ME CHANGE ME CHANGE ME<br />
<br />
##Review copies<br />
<br />
I will send you a free pdf version for the review - PM for details<br />
<br />
<br />
##Review links<br />
<br />
Please post reviews to the following sites:<br />
<br />
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01H85EDV6<br />
http://www.website.com/123xyz<br />
<br />

I've deleted the 'Note from the author' part. That section is not the place to be salesy, it's your opportunity to talk directly to your potential readers. Don't say "Devon did this... devon did that", say "I wrote this book over the course of a couple of years, because I genuinely believe I can help students..." It's a note from the author, from you. Personalise it and you'll get a better response.

I haven't graduated yet, but I was accepted into a Computer Science - Information Security Masters program.

The University I am going to isn't nearly as picky about their applicants, but I will tell you my process.

#0 I graduated with a 3.78 GPA in Undergrad from a small state University.

#1 You will probably have to take the GRE. The school I applied to valued both industry experience and GRE score. My score on the GRE was average. UCSD probably wants a higher score, so study a lot. There are specific books for studying for the GRE. I used this book. The GRE is a pretty intimidating exam. Your brain is working at 100% for over three hours straight.

#2 I had a year of full-time industry experience and my boss/CIO sent letters of recommendation. If you have any internships, list them. If not, get professors (who you are close with) to write your letters.

#3 I had to write two essays to the University. One on personal experience and one on what I expect to gain out of their program. I thought these were pretty easy; have someone close to you who is educated proofread your essays.

#4 I had to submit a resume as well. Find a nice looking template and fill in your information. Use this as an opportunity to plug your projects to show your work. I have a URL to my custom personal portfolio website which showcases my projects.

And then you wait to be accepted. You may be accepted conditionally if you need some prerequisite classes. Check out their program and compare their prerequisites with your undergrad classes so you can optimize (e.g. if Computer Organization is a prerequisite, try to take that in Undergrad as an elective).

My biggest suggestion is to think about how you will pay for your Masters degree. Federal aid in the form of grants is not available for graduate degrees. You will only have access to loans, scholarships, and workstudies. If you are going the scholarship route, then apply early. My workplace pays for about a third of the degree and I just pay the rest because I do not want to have outstanding loans when I graduate.

I'm very distrustful of such claims. What is considered a "jobless degree" today was a perfectly reasonable degree 30 years ago. We crack jokes about philosophy majors or english majors or history majors but there is nothing inherently bad about those majors.

We compare them to hard science majors or engineering majors without examining what exactly distinguishes them. Consensus on reddit appears to be that engineering majors are hard and liberal arts majors are easy. This is probably empirically valid in most US colleges but it wasn't always the case. We used to have a serious liberal arts program in this country and you could expect to devote a considerable amount of effort into getting a history degree or a philosophy degree (or any of the humanities). The idea was "liberal arts" meant rigorous preparation for life in general--critical faculties, writing skills, etc.

A few things happened on the way to the forum. In the late 20th century college ceased to be the limited preserve of the rich and dedicated. Rather for the first time a significant percentage of Americans would attend college--partially due to the GI bill but also due to the spread of secondary education. Go have a look at the percentage of americans with high school diplomas pre WWII. It's pretty amazing. This rise in enrollment coincided with a much less fortuitous change--the ascendance of the business school. Expanded from an original mission to produce (at the undergraduate level) book-keepers and (at the graduate level) managers, the business school has fashioned itself as a generalist trade school with a more expensive tuition. In doing so it has produced a much higher percentage of wealthy alumni (arguably the true goal of a university) who have in turn spent a great deal of money on the schools. Because of this cycle, the goal of business schools has metastasized to other departments--college must be considered a training ground for future employment.

The first thing to suffer in the training ground mentality is the humanities. Who needs to know about shakespeare or Weber (or Webster!) in order to manage a factory. Here we get to the last unfortunate coincidence.

At the time when liberal arts departments should have been mounting a concerted argument in their defense, they were engaged in internecine strife over cultural politics. The 60s (and really the 70s) marked a watershed in the humanities and social sciences. Colleges which had been segregating student bodies (yes, even into the 60s and even big, important colleges) now faced a huge backlash from students and faculty and opened departments devoted to post-colonial study, feminist and black/latino issues. don't get me wrong. All of those departments needed to be opened up. anyone who says that we were learning a complete (or even moderately honest/comprehensive) history when it was all white men is ignorant of the actual goings on. But I digress. These professors and students didn't just devote themselves to teaching black/latino/NA/feminist history. They relished in their victory and focused on the meta-issues like historiography and feminist/marxist/nationalist social theory. The snake began to eat its own tail and outside observers could see it. By the time the humanities awoke from their post-watershed slumber it was too late. The funding and students had gone, along with the expectation that liberal arts meant a strong and rigorous education rather than a simple "rounding out" of a business or engineering student.

There are some other factors at work here. Rising cost and student mobility (compare the average distance traveled for a student in 1960 w/ 1990 from high school to college) have given rise to an entitlement in the student body which the faculty isn't all that quick to disabuse. One way it has been phrased is that students don't really like homework and professors don't like it either, so they both agree to an equilibrium with less of it (that's from an omnibus study on grade inflation--I can find the cite but it may take me a while). "Good" degrees may just be those in fields which due to their own cultural leanings haven't succumbed to lowered standards or lack of rigor. In some cases these are art classes (seriously talk to a BFA student at one of the big private art colleges, their workload is insane). In some cases these are math or engineering majors. But in other places they may be philosophy majors or anthropology majors or econ or poly sci.

Whew. Sorry that's probably way long.

tl;dr American education underwent some serious shit in the last 60 years and we haven't got it all figured out yet.

Edit: some sources just to let people see what I am and am not pulling out of my ass:

• Jerome Karabel's The Chosen isn't about this issue per se but it does give a great window into how restrictive (in terms or race/class) Ivy Leagues were before WWII
  
• Journal of Economic Perspectives article on grade inflation
  
• There is a great book on the rise of the American MBA program in the 20th century whose name escapes me
  
• On the rise of the "hard social sciences" and government funded lab work from the 30s to the 70s you can read Philip Mirowski's Machine Dreams. I didn't really talk about this above either but it is in the mix as well.

This may not be for you since you're too far gone, but you should give this to your kids. Actually, any "kid" (college-aged person) reading this should buy this.

SUMMARY: DON'T MAJOR IN THE LIBERAL ARTS.

Dear Stupid Students, America Can't Afford Your Stupidity

***

>1) Teaching

It's doubtful that you truly need a degree in English to teach basic and useable English to people in foreign countries. There's a great number of people who teach English without English degrees (again, still a total under-utilization of your abilities (assuming you're above ~100 IQ).

>2) Happiness is of value to me

You're able to achieve happiness in ways that

1. don't involve wasting four years of your life (and TENS OF THOUSANDS of yours or someone else's money) receiving a useless piece of paper saying you studied your native, first language,
   
   
2. doesn't require wasting taxpayer money for four years (similar but different to #1),
   
   
3. can actually contribute to society/help people in other countries,
   
   
4. isn't contributing into the scam of modern education
   
   >It's taken me around the world (literally)
   
   Wow, that's surely unique from all the other real degrees that certainly don't offer opportunities to move around the world for work.
   
   >I make about 3K a month writing and self-publishing on Amazon
   
   Here's one list of extremely famous writers who didn't go get a degree in English.
   
   Here's some more.
   
   If you have the passion for writing, go write. DO NOT get a worthless degree in English.
   
   >That might not be brogrammer money, but it's a life that's been a lot more interesting and rewarding than just staring into a monitor 60 hours a week.
   
   This seems bitter? Are you suggesting that I'm a "brogrammer?" What, because I espouse for people to avoid useless degrees who don't actually produce or contribute anything of actual value to society?
   
   >The only way you could possibly think that anything other than STEM = parasite is if you had about zero actual life experience. I'm guessing you went from your parents basement to college to some tech job and don't know jack about what else happens in the world.
   
   Even more bitter? Apparently. I feel like it is a lack of understanding of the world to get that worthless, piece-of-shit degree rather than a STEM degree. Why not do something that people actually care about and that *actually contributes to the society that safely coddled you while you wasted your potential getting a useless degree.
   
   "I just wanna be happy, maaaaaaan."
   
   Here's a list of majors you should go back and get:
   
   

• Chemical Engineering
  
  
• Aerospace Engineering
  
  
• Mechanical Engineering
  
  
• Electrical/Electronics Engineering
  
  
• Computer Engineering/Science/IT or Software Development/Engineering
  
  
• Civil Engineering
  
  
• Applied Physics
  
  
• Applied Mathematics
  
  
• Chemistry
  
  
• Medical School
  
  
  
  You want to know why jobs in these fields pay so much? THEY CONTRIBUTE SO MUCH VALUE TO SOCIETY, they are SO GODDAMN HELPFUL TO PROGRESS.
  
  But fine, go ahead and feel happy in your hippy-dippy worthless bubble.

If you know what you are interested in, look for schools that offer that major. Talk with a teacher or coach who you're close to, or your guidance counselor. They can give you some specific options because they know you and your academic record better.

There are plenty of guidebooks out there. My school is in this one. All the schools in there are great and you might find something that clicks. Your guidance counselor or library will probably have a bunch of books like these for you to browse.

Think about what kind of school you want: big/small, urban/rural, east/west/midwest, strong on-campus community/most people live off-campus. Is cost a concern? Try going to a community college first.

What kind of clubs are available to join? Sports? Greek life? Does overall student support seem nice?

Have the dorms been recently renovated or do most people live off-campus? Is it in a safe area?

How easy is it to declare/change a major and minor?

Do students have good relationships with professors? Is there a career center, a tutoring and learning disability center? Are there people that can help you find internships and funding, set up job-shadowing?

Are you ok with Teaching Assistants running most of your classes? Does being in a room with 200 students terrify you? How about a room with 4 students?

Make a list of your likes and dislikes of the colleges you've already visited. Did school A have too much of a "party" atmosphere for you? Was B too big or too small? Was school C too far away or too close? Find what you like, and look for colleges that have a few or more of those qualities. Not everyone has an "a-ha!" moment when they find the perfect college for them. You might have to transfer to find a good place for you. Good luck!

Doesn't sound like you have too much to worry about so long as the bad grades are older and you can get a decent pGRE score. Where you can get into will depend on how well your interests align with the faculty at a school and how well you can sell yourself to them. Plus luck, which will play a bigger factor than you might think. This book has a lot of good advice tailored to physics. Part of the book is about ranking programs into tiers then finding where your application fits. Tier 1 schools are places like MIT and Stanford, basically you need to really stand out since so many people apply and they have low acceptance rates. Tier 2 schools are all great schools (ranked 10-30 schools) and can be very hard to get into. For these expect to need a 3.75 GPA and pGRE of 750+ to be competitive grade wise. Tier 3 schools are going to be good schools ranked 31-50, generally these are larger schools like large state universities. You should be competitive at these schools with your application. Tier 4 schools are generally much smaller, but still good schools ranked 50-100. A 3.0 should be competitive. Tier 5 is a mixed bag of good and bad but 2.5 should be fine for most of them.

Sounds like you are competitive at tier 3 schools, pick some tier 2 schools you are interested in then some tier 3, and some tier 4. maybe 20 schools in total. Then start researching to boil down that list to a couple reach schools (tier 2), a couple safety schools (tier 4), and 6 or so tier 3 schools. Base your decisions off of compatibility with those schools and their professors. Do not limit yourself to just the west, trust me I did that and now I'm shut out of grad school for a year because I was too restrictive in my first round of applications. This process will be expensive, plan for ~$150 per school in transcript and application fees and have your list prepared before you take the pGRE in October so you can take advantage of the few free score reports you get.

I work at a community college, and we definitely have a significant number of students who are people of color and/or live in economic precarity. So, it sounds like we are interested in working with similar populations of students. Here are a few resources I've found helpful:

Reading on critical pedagogy for a theoretical framework. Freire and Giroux are where I'd start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_pedagogy

The idea of backward design for semester-length planing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_design

I'm having trouble finding a good resource to link to quickly, but the idea of transparency in lesson design seems important to me.

"How Learning Works" and "What the Best College Teachers Do" for more day to day things:

https://www.amazon.com/How-Learning-Works-Research-Based-Principles/dp/0470484101

https://www.amazon.com/What-Best-College-Teachers-Do/dp/0674013255/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=F2A8M8CSVQKDBS14P2QC



"In The Middle" for a good outline of a workshop approach to teaching writing

https://www.heinemann.com/inthemiddle/

I haven't found a good single book that talks about teaching active reading, but there are a lot of resources online, and I've found teaching it explicitly and modeling it for my students as part of a whole class discussion to work pretty well.

As far as the critical theory aspect of reading (which I do think should be taught early on and even to people who are just beginning to read at the college level) I like "Texts and Contexts" and "Critical Encounters"

https://www.amazon.com/Critical-Encounters-High-School-English/dp/0807748927

https://www.amazon.com/Texts-Contexts-Writing-Literature-Critical/dp/0205716741

Hope that's helpful! Good luck to you!

/u/tuckermalc and /u/pizzzahero both have great comments. I'll add a bit. Go to /r/stoicism, read [William Irvine's book] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195374614?keywords=william%20irvine&qid=1456992251&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1), then read [Epictetus's Enchiridion] (http://www.amazon.com/Enchiridion-Dover-Thrift-Editions-Epictetus/dp/0486433595/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1456992275&sr=8-1&keywords=enchiridion). follow their guidelines. Also check out /r/theXeffect. The most important thing is controlling your habits. If you're in the habit of eating healthy, getting enough sleep, going to the gym, etc. then you're set.

Now for stuff that's harder to do. Go see a therapist. Or a psychiatrist. Try to find a [therapist who can do EMDR] (http://www.emdr.com/find-a-clinician/) with you, it's a very effective technique (I saw a clinician who uses EMDR for two years, and it changed my life-- and, importantly, it's supported by strong scientific evidence, it's not quackery stuff like homeopathy or acupuncture). If you decide to go to a psychiatrist, tell them you don't want SSRIs. Look at other drugs: Wellbutrin, tricyclics, SNRIs, etc (check out selegiline in patch form, called EMSAM, as well). Seriously, go see a professional and talk to them. I have no doubt that you're wrestling with mental illness. I have been there. For me, it just felt normal. I didn't understand that other people didn't feel like I did...so it took me a long time to go get help. But it's so important to just start working through these things and getting support. That's really the most important thing you can do. It will make your life so much better. If you aren't able to get to a therapist, do Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) on yourself! [This is a brilliant program] (https://moodgym.anu.edu.au) that's widely respected. Do it over and over. Also read [Feeling Good by David Burns] (http://www.amazon.com/Feeling-Good-New-Mood-Therapy/dp/0380810336/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1456992639&sr=8-1&keywords=feeling+good+david+burns). It's a book on CBT, and can help you get started. There are lots of other resources out there, but you have to begin by realizing that something is wrong.

Finally, I'll talk about college. Don't try to go to fricking Harvard or MIT. You won't get in, and those aren't even the right schools for you. There are many excellent schools out there that aren't the super super famous Ivies. Look at reputable state schools, like UMich, UMinnesota, the UC system, etc. get ["Colleges that Change Lives"] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143122304?keywords=colleges%20that%20change%20lives&qid=1456992746&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1), the [Fiske Guide to Colleges] (http://www.amazon.com/Fiske-Guide-Colleges-2016-Edward/dp/1402260660/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1456992768&sr=8-1&keywords=fiske+guide), and [Debt-Free U] (http://www.amazon.com/Debt-Free-Outstanding-Education-Scholarships-Mooching/dp/1591842980/ref=pd_sim_14_15?ie=UTF8&dpID=515MwKBIpzL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR104%2C160_&refRID=1VC3C23RJP6ZMXGG5QBA). One thing I realized after college was that I would've been happy at any of the school I looked at. People are fed such a line of BS about school, like you have to go to the top Ivies or something. No way. Find a good place at which you can function, learn as much as possible, and have a good social life. Like another person said, also look at going to a community college for a year and then transferring-- my relative did this and ended up at Harvard for grad school in the end.

Fwiw, they do this more for white people than they do for black people. Athletes (most athletes at places like Harvard play sports like squash, not basketball) and legacies make up a large percentage of the student body.

If you're interested, here is a really interesting book talking about the history of admission at Harvard, Yale and Princeton. These places were built by and for prominent male WASPS, and they're still the ones who fund it, so there are all kinds of things built in to ensure that people like them still get in, namely easier admission for legacies and athletes.

A major point of the book is that the idea of merit in this sense is kind of made up. They create a class of the kinds of people they like and say that it's based on merit. They used to basically just use test scores, then those schools started filling up with Jews, so they decided to assess "character" as well, which meant basically meant being WASPy. Now it's kind of the same thing but with Asians. They still rely heavily on "character" and "leadership." The main thing is that it's a balancing act between a ton of different interests, and most of those interests are rich old white dudes.


Edit: Found this:
“Being African American instead of white is worth an average of 230 additional SAT points on a 1600 point scale, but recruited athletes reap an advantage equivalent to 200 SAT points. Other things equal, Hispanic applicants gain the equivalent of 185 points, which is only slightly more than the legacy advantage which is 160 points. Coming from an Asian background, however, is comparable to a loss of 50 SAT points.”

I don't think there's anything Trump or anyone else can do, at least if you're talking about a traditional brick and mortar 4 year university. The reason for this is well meaning progressive policies. They said "college is a good thing, lets make it easier for them to go". They offered cheap and easy money. When more money is introduced to a market than would be there otherwise prices go up. They answered by throwing more money in the forms of cheap loans, grants, scholarships, GI bills, ect. Prices go up even more. This cycle has been continuing for 70 years. You are about to go to college at a time when it's never been more expensive to do so and the value of most degrees have been so low. No politician can fix that, it's going to take a huge bubble burst and market correction.

I would recommend not going. There areonline degrees now that are fully accredited, here's an example. If I had to do it over again I would join the National Guard, and while your serving you can take these CLEP tests, which if you pass count as a college credit. Most colleges accept some of these credits, there are 3 that will give you a degree almost exclusively based on CLEP credits. And they are free for active serving armed forces (something like $200 a test otherwise). Google and Facebook and other tech companies sponsor something called nanodegrees, worth looking into. Trade school is looked down upon but today it's the more economically sound option.

Whatever you do I recommend the book Worthless by Aaron Clarey. I wish I read it when I was your age.

Sorry for not really answering your question, but good luck to ya.

I would check out most of Cal Newport's recent writings. He received his PhD in Computer Science from MIT, and is now teaching at Georgetown.

His main thesis is deliberate practice consists of lots of different facets, most of which aren't necessarily thought about. While his work focuses a lot on improving work in "knowledge fields" it is drawn mostly from creative pursuits. He argues that thinking about your habits for practicing and learning (meta-habits) are just as important as sitting down to practice or learn. For example, knowing how to build a clear path of improvement and success in learning the piano is as important as sitting down and working through the hard parts. Sometimes the hardest part is simply figuring out where it is wisest to invest your time.


His article "The Deliberate Creative" I found to be particularly enlightening, among others. He's also been published in the New York Times, The Economist, and has five bestselling books.

On a side note, I originally found him looking for ways to improve my study habits, which is what he originally wrote about as an undergraduate. Any current high school or college students would benefit GREATLY (IMO) from his blog and first three books. Seriously, the guy has some great stuff.

>Or were you personally, thoroughly, manually evaluated on your skills?

Yes, as close to this as you could realistically get. I went to a a small private college with class sizes of as little as 2-3 people in some departments.

Even teachers teaching the same class had different tests and assignments tailored to the needs of the students. So if you want to stick to your standardized comment, it was standardized at the specific class (not even course) level.

The average class size for the entire college was 13 students.

Edit:

I'll also add that because of the very small class sizes, students were for the most part personally, manually evaluated. Sure, they got grades on tests, but often, usually if in the student's benefit, grades were adjusted based on personal evaluation. When you have 5 students, you can do things like that.

On an off-topic note: Small class sizes also allowed some classes to just be listed as TBD on the schedule when signing up, so the professor could just pick a time that worked for everyone afterwards. And you get to do things live have class in a garden on campus, or even the cafeteria. It was an all-around amazing experience, but unfortunately not one that I will likely be able to afford for my own kids.

If anyone is interested in a college with an environment like this, check out Colleges That Change Lives. Luckily, my dad read it before we started looking at colleges, which got me looking in that direction.

Couple tips I've learned:

Eventually, with enough practice, exuding authority will make you feel good. It is a part of your job. Consider it this way: if a student is misbehaving in class then they aren't your main priority, the other students are. Those other students are also probably hoping that you'll chastise or kick out the misbehaving students and when you do so, it will greatly improve their opinion of you and your relationship with them. It is really a win/win situation.

In terms of not knowing material well, I would imagine almost every teacher has experienced this feeling, I know that I have. I'm only a few years into my career, but I view such classes as an exciting challenge, not a ticking time bomb. I get to learn more material, which I love to do, and I find that since the content is fresh in my mind I'm a better teacher.

For more on the latter topic I highly recommend the book Teaching What You Don't Know by Therese Huston.

Since you can't put more hours into the day, one of those items is going to have to give if you expect to give the friend more time on that day.

You could fit the friend into the same time slots that you do those items, you could just flat out reduce how much time you give those items, or you could get more efficient in doing items.

I've already posted my initial thoughts on squeezing the friend into your time slots (phone calls, study together, eat one of your meals like breakfast/lunch/dinner together) without changing them, and thoughts on reducing the time for the others (exercise, morning routine) that seem like they can be reduced.

So the last thing I can advise is getting more efficient with your studying since that seems to be sucking up a lot of time. And for that, I'll share this book (especially chapter 2) and this book by Cal Newport.

I am a PhD student now, so I'll share my thoughts that may be relevant for you. I am going to suggest a somewhat aggressive timeline that I personally think optimizes your time while still preparing you to be a good PhD applicant, which basically comes down to: research experience and your physics GRE, more on those below.

If your not redoing a whole degree (which you should not) then you really just need 2 things for a good PhD application: the more or less standard "core" undergrad courses- Modern Physics, Thermodynamics, E&M, and Quantum, and secondly- RESEARCH EXPERIENCE (research spiel in next paragraph). You could really do the core requirements in a year, but that leaves you with a screwy PhD application timeline. So spreading your undergrad courses and research over 2 years is reasonable. Additionally the core course mentioned are primarily what is covered on the physics GRE. I would start familiarizing yourself with the content of the pGRE immediately after modern physics since you are on a compressed timeline. Ok now on to the research spiel.

The purpose of doing a PhD and being a physicist is primarily to do physics research. If you don't like research, then you won't like being a physicist. Luckily you have a programming background, so you could get involved with research pretty quickly (virtually all research involves some sort of programming these days).

There is so much more to say with regards to grad school, but I will refer you to the following book

https://www.amazon.com/Getting-Grad-School-Physics-physical/dp/1499732244

Which will fill in the rest of the details and elaborate on what I've said. I really don't think I could say much more that won't be repeating what is already said in the book.

I will say that physics research involving quantum mechanics directly will be theoretical, and the main areas where researchers eat quantum mechanics for breakfast are: cosmology, particle and nuclear, condensed matter. For experiment you may or may not need to know quantum mechanics very well.

Astronomy is basically experimental astrophysics, and is all about data collection and analysis, with tons and tons of algorithms implemented along the way.

I myself am in theoretical nuclear and particle physics mainly focused on simulation. Hope I have helped you in some way!

In answering both of your questions - I am not aware of any higher education literature that upholds the idea of what you are framing as "impossibly difficult" courses. Moreover, much of the research that I have come across would actually suggest that this is really quite a poor course design that is doing more to uphold the professor's sense of identity than it is creating positive and engaging learning environment. As you said, this is highly 'gate keepy'. Certainly, I can see some grad students buying into it as they are highly motivated and want to become a part of the field however I don't think this course design would even serve most grad students.

In short - I imagine that he gets away with it as he is a senior professor teaching students who are otherwise highly engaged with the field but on the whole, I think most educational designers would say its quite poor pedagogical design.

However, if you are keen on developing great course design - a couple of great books to read which are widely cited in higher ed teaching and learning. They both offer theoretical and praxis-oriented approaches to course design that you would likely appreciate. they are Teaching as Design Science by Laudrillard and Learning to Teach in Higher Education by Ramsden

You're right, in that they are dumb.^(http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/09/28/at_the_elite_colleges___dim_white_kids/?page=1)

But mostly, you're wrong. It's not a "dumb tax." It's "pay to play."

Legacy admissions are not a "dumb tax;" it's there to keep poor kids out. It's not about meritocracy, it's about exclusion.

And money isn't the only criteria; race is also a factor.

Docket systems (geographic quotas) are to keep out Jews (mostly from NY & NJ)--& favor certain private schools. Extra-cirricular requirements, especially those that emphasize students be "well-rounded," are there to keep out Asians. Affirmative action is there to get African-Americans and Latinos in.

This system is unlikely to change, because (1) universities, like most things, need money to run, (2) they also want prestige, and (3) a lot of very influential people are going to raise a ruckus over their progeny couldn't get in.

By the way, there is one caveat: It is in a university's interest to attract people who would are mostly likely to go into well-paying jobs, which means Wall Street or big law firms--and extracurricular activities in high school is one way to identify people who gravitate towards those careers. Kids who excel in academics and go into academia tend not have a lot of moolah to donate.

TL;DR: Elite schools are mostly schools for the elites. If you want to join them, apply to the Ivy Leagues. If you want to be judged purely on academic merit, check out places like Berkeley or CalTech (which, coincidentally, happen to be white minority establishments).

If you're interested in this subject, you might want to check out The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton by Jerome Karabel.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Chosen-Admission-Exclusion-Princeton/dp/0618574581

Berkeley enrollment data:

http://opa.berkeley.edu/uc-berkeley-fall-enrollment-data

CalTech enrollment data:

http://www.registrar.caltech.edu/statistics.htm

Is the 600 questions book you've got this one? If so, brilliant, the questions in there are harder than the actual questions you'll get, so it's perfect to practice with, but don't get discouraged by it. I got that book and was horrified at how difficult some of the questions were.

With the resit stuff, honestly it's more the marks that matter and their contribution to next year than the actual grades you got, so a remark to push a subject to an A isn't necessarily all that worth it. Some of the other medics I knew who got low A's in biol and chem decided to retake anyway just to push up their chances of an A overall for the A level. I can't talk for other subjects, but with chemistry the retake didn't actually take much extra effort, since a lot of the second year stuff (we were doing OCR salters chemistry) built off the first year stuff, so by the time I did the retake I could have got the marks I needed on it in my sleep. I imagine it's probably the same for most subjects.

How much guidance are your college giving you with the personal statement? I found what they wanted and what I'd initially thought I'd do were completely different. At first I'd thought I should avoid going down the whole generic "I want to help people" route, since it's basically a given, and I thought it'd just be dull, but apparently that's totally wrong - the more generic it seems, the better (I actually ended up using a thesaurus to find more ways of saying "help"). The way we were advised to stand out is how we talked about our work experience and volunteering. If you can sound like you really understand what being a doctor is like by reference to what you've actually seen then they really love it. If you'd like (and promise not to copy, of course) I can show you my one as an example - it got me four interviews, so I must've done something right (can't help a little boast, I was so pleased with myself over that :D)

The actual workload doesn't get much worse, except for some of the coursework is a bit of a pain, it's that what you learn becomes harder to understand right off the bat. That said, it does depend on what subjects you've got - my view of things is pretty heavily skewed by further maths, which just got crazy hard in the second year. The actual biol and chem don't get that much worse (chem a little worse than biol though, at least for me), it's more memory with those two.

And don't worry about it, I'm really happy to help.

Use medify.co.uk to revise for UKCAT, I used it thoroughly but I panicked during the first section of the test because I am a slow reader. Overall score was 700,

breakdown
Reading- 600
maths-800
non verbal reasoning (the shapes thing)- 840
Verbal reasoning- 560 (i used an old book for this, and they changed the logarithms for the questions that year, so my answers were given incorrect, even though in practice i was scoring the highest in this section)

As for university recommendations, I suggest you look through this forum page which discusses which Uni's to apply to depending on your strengths. http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/wiki/Applying_to_Medical_School_using_your_Strengths

Lastly if you do get accepted for an interview, make sure you use this book for interview prep

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Medical-Interviews-Questions-Analysed-Multiple-Mini-Interviews/dp/1905812051

Don't just read the question and think ok this is how I am going to say it, remember you are competing against many other candidates and in order to make yourself shine, your answers must be succinct, personal and original. The most crucial part of any interview is that if you don't know an answer, be humble and say you don't know. Apart from oxbridge, where they want to see your deduction and induction skills. Interviewers only mark what you speak, not what you do and do not know. So if you say that I don't know a question, they will ask another question which you can hopefully respond to. You can also give a semi-knowlegable response. E.g In one of my interviews , I was asked " who do you think is the leader in a surgery ? ", It was a trick question because anyone can be a leader in any given situation depending on the resources and type of surgery. I didn't know this, so at the time I said, "based off my experience I have only seen surgeons lead surgeries, however my empirical observations may not translate into other environments, In the present day where nurses are substituting for surgeons in many smaller cases, there should be no reason why they too cannot lead surgeries. They then followed up with " So, who else can lead a surgery apart from a nurse and a doctor", I just said I didnt know and we moved on.

Additionally, if you haven't already started, please start writing your personal statement, it is very important and pretty much got me my interviews because my igcse grades were relatively subpar.

I always recommend these books to first year
students:

• How to become a straight-A student
  
  
• How to win at college
  
  The author also has a good blog. Best of luck, things are going to get harder.

I really struggled academically until I had a professor teach me to learn by active recall. Basically, you need to be able to explain your notes without looking at them. I would write down questions from my notes for thirty minutes, then spend fifteen trying to answer them, marking any that I didn't know. Then I would take a break. I would try and do several of these study blocks each day. You can't procrastinate with this method, but I went from a C/B student to a straight A student in one semester. Remember to focus on content you don't know.

Find an activity to get involved in. I was overly involved because I was a tour guide, worked in a research lab, volunteered with Meals on Wheels, was a resident assistant, was in an honor society, nutrition club, volunteered as English as a second language conversation partner, and did meal planning/grocery shopping at my cooperative house. I kind of burned myself out and would recommend just joining one or two activities, but being really involved.

I highly recommend this book: https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-College-Surprising-Countrys/dp/0767917871

Not if you're studying something valuable in STEM. There's too many bullshitters selling bullshit courses on campuses.

Why do you want tenure? I'm sure you have good reasons, but couldn't morally be tenured, if I wasn't 100% sure that I was teaching something valuable. If I didn't feel that what I am teaching, that is something people actually need and want despite my tenure. Just like if I were a drug dealer or a slaver, then my success would be dependent on people suffering from it.

What are you studying?

The books I am paraphrasing from are Antifragile, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Worthless, by Aaron Clarey.

Book Recommendations:

How to Become a Straight-A Student
How to Win at College

Both are by same author (Cal Newport), both are quick reads, in the 200-page range but deliver good wisdom in those pages.

yes

You're going to have your prioritize and manage your time really well. You can still have of fun in college even you need to get really good grades.I recommend you read this book.

To begin you may find it helpful to check out:
Clarey, "Worthless"
http://www.amazon.com/Worthless-Aaron-Clarey-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM

As for the money, note that there is a big distinction between "Computer Science", a teaching track major and "Software Engineering" or "Information Technology" with emphasis in software development; both of these tracks are intended for actual practitioners. A teaching track major gets you a teacher's income. A software engineering major gets you at least a high 5-figures to start and 6-figures within 5 years or so if you are good.

As for C# and Java these languages really (MO) not the right path to learn first. Learn C/C++ first to learn about all the trouble you can have with memory leaks and other things that C# and Java hide from you and will have to debug anyway. Better to have the experience going in.

Good luck!

I'm sure the folks at A+ are just joyful at Aaron Clarey's "Worthless". That book perfectly defines "You want fries wid dat?"

http://www.amazon.com/Worthless-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM

My comment to the A+ ers it to tell 'em if you don't like the joke, then don't tell it. If you don't want to hear it, put your fingers in your ears and sing La La La La while I'm telling it.

Stick to your guns on the notetaking thing. CC kids are lazy and just want the easier way to do things, not the more educational.

You might pick up James Lang's On Course if you're looking for a guide to teaching. In the meantime, use the previous instructor's materials, but pay attention to where they work for and where they don't so that next semester you know what to change to make it more your own. Teachers are never so effective as when they're teaching their own stuff.

Feel free to PM if you have specific Qs. I've taught years of English 101 at Universities and CCs. What I have to tell you may or may not be useful in your field, but some teaching ideas are universal. If by chance you DO teaching English, I have some strong formed opinions on technique.

Hang in there!

I use Critical Encounters in High School English in my classroom, and I love it. It provides excellent lesson ideas, explanations of theories, and in-depth chapters of some theories and how to introduce them. http://www.amazon.com/Critical-Encounters-High-School-English/dp/0807748927

Edit: Oh, and I also teach all levels of juniors.

I hope we do some Rossetti, now or later. I'd forgotten how much I liked "Goblin Market" until you quoted it to me the other day.

I found this book I've been meaning to mention to you: A Guide to the Classical Education You Never Had. I've got a library copy now. Not sure how useful it is and I'm still trying to decide whether I need to own it, but it's got some good curricula: Fiction, Autobiography, Drama, Poetry, History, and Science. Its tips on how to absorb and analyze information have really been working for me with To the Lighthouse, and I plan to use them for Metamorphoses. A couple weird things, like for autobiography, Mein Kampf makes the list (side-eyeing that one), but I can already see how I'd switch the lists around to suit myself.

I love the text Critical Encounters in High School Critical Encounters in HS English — she has tons of good activities.

One that I’ve used before is to create lists of questions typical of several lenses and have the students do station work as they rotate through. You can do this with a full text, an extract, etc.

You should buy "Worthless: The indispensible guide to choosing the right major" by Aaron Clarey on Amazon. It is 4.93$ on Kindle (paperback costs 12$) and is going to save you lots of money in student loans by showing you what the best degrees are and which ones you must avoid at all costs. It is thanks to Aaron Clarey that I have gone back to college to major in electrical engineering. I found him through Terrence Popp's youtube channel, he is one of his sponsors. He gives amazing career advice, he is not a MGTOW but he is still very much red pilled though I would put him more in the purple piller category because he believes in NAWALTs but that does not matter for what you are seeking. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B006N0THIM/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=

I'll recommend James Lang's "On Course" as a great introduction to teaching your first college level course.

https://www.amazon.com/Course-Week-Week-Semester-Teaching/dp/0674047419/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=8A4Y13R9S7GXNBYHX587

It might sound ridiculous, but I recommend you watch the episode of the Tim Ferriss Experiment in which he learns to speak Tagalog very quickly.

There's a lot of good information there that also pertains to the question you're asking.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2oiuf9

>Help me retain more during reading sessions (Usually 1-6 hours long in length)

You should also get a journal for reading. And read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Well-Educated-Mind-Classical-Education-Expanded/dp/039308096X

One of my students just gave this book a glowing review after receiving it as part of a campus workshop: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1620367564

(I know, I know - I’m as surprised as anyone that they actually read parts of it already and voluntarily! I’ve heard the faculty companion book is great too, though admittedly I’ve yet to crack open my copy...)

Two books to read are Cal Newport's How to Win at College and How to Become a Straight A-Student.

After reading his books, check out his blog, Study Hacks.

Generally speaking I'd suggest finding some of the websites for Teaching and Learning Centers at various universities, and seeing what online resources they have. Such as:

• Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching
  
• University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching
  
• University of Texas Center for Teaching and Learning
  
  Especially if the university to which you are applying has a teaching/learning center, you should visit their website and find out all you can about it.
  
  If you have more time, the book Teaching at its Best is an awesome resource. Written by my former boss/mentor Linda Nilson, who is a legend in faculty development.
  

I studied using this book. I spent approximately 1 month just practicing the questions and trying to understand their reasoning for the answers. Did well enough to apply anywhere.

Hope this helps.

From around the 1880s until as late as the 1940s, the "Ivy League" actually had a terrible reputation for academic rigor, mostly because of its class-based admission practices.

So those schools were, and remain, exceptionally elite. In 1950, for example, 278 students from elite prep schools applied to Harvard and 245 were accepted. The acceptance rate from Exeter and Andover was 94 percent.

Even today Harvard posted its lowest acceptance margins in history -- only 5.9%.


edit: I don't know why I'm being downvoted.

Disclaimer: I have hired helped make hire/fire decisions for faculty members but never worked specifically in a College of Nursing.

That aside, she should expect to be asked about her philosophy on teaching and learning. It is possible they may ask her to do a teaching demonstration, but likely they would have conveyed that well in advance.

For new faculty, I used this as my "teaching 101": https://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Its-Best-Research-Based-Instructors/dp/0470401044

Overall, I can't think of anything to avoid. I usually like to be asked 'what is the typical day like,' or something to that effect.

Take some time to read books about learning. There is a new on called Teach Yourself How to Learn. I read Teach Students how to Learn and found it very good. The important thing to keep is mind that you must understand the concepts, not just mimic what the professor does. Also, don't be afraid to reach out for help if you're struggling with algebra or trig. They take persistence and if you don't have them mastered, Calculus can be tricky.

It's really all about practice and persistence really...I had to learn how to study in middle school, which is why I didn't need my mom asking me "did you do your homework/did you study" everyday. Unless you were directed under those terms, it's kind of difficult to ask you of that kind of diligence and self-dependence when you've never been raised under that environment or put it into practice.

This is a good book that I read over the summer last year, and it really helped a TON before returning to college; even for someone like me that has been putting these practices into play for awhile.

Watch this video series, it will teach you good student habits and techniques: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqPtvG80ufOPH3OUoMpM4OThBpIRkrw-I

If you're putting that much time in but having poor results, then it's not procrastination that's hurting you. It's how you study. Cal Newport wrote a very helpful book on the subject, read it during your next break: http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-College-Surprising-Countrys/dp/0767917871/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_y

http://amzn.com/0767922719

http://amzn.com/0767917871

Here's a quick synopsis of the first book, although I recommend reading the whole thing: http://www.scribd.com/doc/18512444/How-to-Become-a-StraightA-Student

listen to me. if you're going for English or art don't go. It'll be a huge waste of time and money. Read this book and follow aaron clarey on youtube, he saved my life. https://www.amazon.com/Worthless-Aaron-Clarey-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM

This is the book I use. It's a goldmine of strategies.

Here you go - ‘Worthless - A Young Person’s Guide to Choosing the Right Major’

Im sorry.

Here, read this:

http://www.amazon.com/Worthless-Aaron-Clarey-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/education/edlife/18phd-t.html?pagewanted=1

You realize that the US college admissions system is an anti-Semitic invention, right?

Source

https://www.amazon.com/Worthless-Aaron-Clarey-ebook/dp/B006N0THIM

Aaron Clarey's "Worthless"

Here is the mobile version of your link

Buy this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Getting-Grad-School-Physics-physical/dp/1499732244/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=getting+into+grad+school+for+physics&qid=1562922761&s=gateway&sprefix=getting+into+grad+&sr=8-1

I helped me answer a lot of questions about the application process.

>Has the concept of the academic institution become inept and obsolete in 2018? Is it now just a place for the children of the upper middle classes to party for four years and learn about art history and men see it as a scam?

Ayup -- Cf WORTHLESS

Except the idea of "character" on applications is specifically created to be a black box that magically, we-don't-know-why-it-keeps-doing-that-honestly, chucks out far more Asian applicants than any other race.

The black box used to be directed against Jews, but now it's a truly egalitarian holistic system that just so happens to hate Asians? Bullshit.

"Chastened by their recent experience with the traditional system of admission examinations, which had begun yielding the 'wrong' [Wong lol] students, the leaders of the Big Three devised a new admissions regime that allowed them to accept - and reject - whomever they desired. ... The centerpiece of the new policy would be "character" —a quality thought to be in short supply among Jews but present in abundance among high-status Protestants."