| I just don't do well on tests, my professors knew that for example, when I was one of the few people whom was able to complete the projects in my OS internals class. but i was the only one getting 50's on the tests. It sucked, not much I could do about it. Problem sets aren't as bad, I still have trouble with them. Most of my problem sets in Engineering we were only give 1-2 days for each, except in Physics which was a week. I still do much better in labs and PS than tests.
The recent Valedictorian of my EE department, was 100% procedural, he wasn't a true engineer, all he did was remember precedure, if you interrupted procedure he wouldn't work to well. Problem sets and tests are straight from the book and rarely change procedure and this is why I can say that sometimes a 3.9 is not as good as a 3.3. Id much rather have a dynamic 3.3 than a procedural 3.9, though I would love a 3.9 dynamic, but they are rare.
If you learn by doing practice of tons and tons of problems and memorizing steps then you are a procedural engineer, if you actually learn the concepts of the tasks and they try to solve, you are dynamic.
When I read numbers, sometimes i see them backwards, switched and stuff, sometimes i see different notations and such, so as you can probably consider, taking a test is really hard, as I usually have to do everything 2x-3x. But thats how I am and how I was born, I wont and haven't ever taken help from anybody.
Good thing im not a AE or ME, I could kill somebody lol. |