The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Re: Practical experience vs coop learning; standards
Replies: 1   Last Post: Jul 11, 1995 6:24 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Michael Moy (send mail to 11-Jul-1995 0915

Posts: 12
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Practical experience vs coop learning; standards
Posted: Jul 11, 1995 9:26 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

>I'd really like to see all these studies about what employers want. Sure,
>working with others is important, but I think there's probably an assumption
>that the-employee-to-be is competent. Without individual competence in basic
>things like writing, reading, and mathematics, a master cooperative worker
>isn't worth much.
>In my previous life as an auditor, I spent years traveling from city to city
>doing payroll audits. I hired lots of people and it was most difficult simply
>finding people who could follow instructions, show up on time, do basic
>computations, and generally be a competent employee. Whether this person was
>capable of being a master problem solver in a group was a pretty low

We look at the resume first. A candidate will not get an interview without the
appropriate technical background. Then we have one to two days of interviews
where we assess technical competency and ability to work individually and in a
group. This is for engineering jobs.

> It's interesting that some would find time to heckle some of us who are not
>native English speakers doing a fine job of communicating on this forum while
>ignoring the remarkable prose of the Assessment Standards.

I read the standards a few years ago from copies at the library. Just a comment
on standards in general: I've perused and used as reference the ANSI SQL 92 and
SQL 3 standards and they are several times larger than the NCTM standards. The
language is very dry, technical and monotonous. The NCTM standards were
friendly by comparison.

As a result, there are books that describe the SQL standards in more
down-to-earth terms. It would be nice if there were books to explain the
standards so that more people would know what they are.

Michael Moy

Comments here are my own and don't reflect thos of my employer.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.