That will depend. For me, Multitasking is really not my thing. I tend to overlook many things when I multitask. This is because when I multitask, I tend to be more easily distracted by other things, such as my IM services, social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook and games. My mind keeps swaying back and forth when I am multitasking and it might sway to the wrong place. Therefore, to me, Multitasking is equivalent to procrastination. When I focus my mindset on one single task, I tend to be at least 3 times more productive than multitasking. Hence, for me, multitasking gives me a false sense of achievement.
However, that is in my opinion only. Some people could really multitask well. By multitasking well, I mean by managing their different tasks properly so that each task would have an equal amount of effort distributed into it. That would give people a real sense of achievement.
Is learning 3D and design different from learning programming, or is all learning the same? Why?
Learning 3D and learning programming are usually not the same. Learning 3D requires the person to learn all about interface, get used to it, and then let their own creative juices flow. 3D also has a visual outlook to learning, where you can see how your object change as you create it and modify it.
Learning programming is different. It requires the user to learn and memorize what each different syntax does and on how to apply those syntax. In programming, everything you do is in text and you would not know whether your output would be nice or not untill you finished everything.
However, both are same in the way that both need precision and practice. Practice leads to precision. If a person does not practice something enough, he will naturally be not good at it. This applies to all of learning. Also, with practice, you will be more precise in your work. Just like for 3D, you need to precise so that models don't overlap each other and in programming, you need to be precise, otherwise your entire program won't work at all.
The article states that "Learning is actually a very complex operation for an individual". Do you agree with this? Do you feel that you approach your learning in the best way - if yes, how, and if no, how can you change your work style?
I have to agree with this statement. When someone learns a new topic, they will have to process the information in their brain and then memorize the information that was taught. By processing, I mean by taking the information, breaking it up into different parts so that the brain can know the full meaning of the information. Also, application of the information learnt is also part of learning. This is usually one of the hardest parts of learning, as there might be infinite ways that the information can be applied, and one must know which correct form of application to use.
My approach to my own learning might be the best way for me. I learn things in my own pace, whenever I feel interested. See, when I am interested, I put in all my attention into the thing that I am interested in and don't like to be disturbed when I am doing it. With my own style of learning, alot of information can be seeped through my mind and I am usually clear headed when learning. However, the only problem with this way is that it is kind of hard to build interest in learning. Usually, interest only builds up within me when I feel like my grades are dropping or when I have last minute work to do. My style of learning would be made better if I can, in my own free time, build up interest in my subjects and deem them as fun.
What are your thoughts about the last paragraph in the extract?
I totally agree with what is being said in the last paragraph. This is because you are doing your work for other people to look at and to use, not for yourself. Therefore, you cannot just do your work using only your own mindset.
You see, communication is necessary to the fact that you are not the only person in this world. A person must take criticism and comments about his/her work in order to improve and to serve the world better. Without criticism, a person would think that his or her work is perfect and market it out, only to find out that nobody likes the work at all. That's why in gaming, there are playtesting stages such as alpha stage, closed beta stage and open beta stage.
Also, A person has got to fit in with his group. Imagine if a person creates part of an extremely nice jigsaw puzzle, whereas a person creates the other half. However, if these two people don't work together and the pieces don't fit, then the jigsaw puzzle is just deemed useless. People are like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. They have got to fit in with each other to create a powerful force, just like how pieces of a jigsaw puzzle form together to create a picture.
Should your lecturers also focus on your work attitude, or just leave you to sink or swim on your own? Why?
I think that lecturers should focus on our work attitude, to some certain extent. Lecturers are called their namesake for a reason. They are here to lecture us about work, so that knowledge would be transferred to us. However, that is where the lecturers stop their involvement. It is then up to the student to decided how he wants to use the knowledge that is passed on to us. If the student decides not to use the knowledge and play games whole day, then it is not the lecturers fault.
This is unlike high school, where our teachers spoonfeed us with information. We have our own responsibility to learn. Also, I think that by using our own responsibility to learn, we can learn multiple times more than if lecturers were to teach us instead. When we go out to the industry to work, it doesn't mean that we have to stop learning. By then, there are no "Lecturers" to help us in our learning, and that we should do everything ourselves. This is a good time to start from.
However, even though lecturers do not interfere in how we perceive our work, they should be contactable at all times, so that students can contact them and ask for their advice in work.
No comments:
Post a Comment