Rush Onto The Court ...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm actually interested understanding the reason why I should answer one way or the other. Learning reasons for interpretations will make me (and everybody else on the Forum) a better official.

I consider the Forum to be an extension my local board exam study group.

The bolded statement has always been my MO... independent of this forum. Those who contribute regularly here are already striving to be better officials... independent of this forum.

Your constant back-and-forth with yourself and your pedantic obsession with IAABO test answers often stifles or kills what could be fruitful conversations.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Learning reasons for interpretations will make me a better official.

Originally Posted by Raymond

... has always been my MO...

And mine also.

As both a student and a teacher, I have always stressed understanding as a necessary supplement to rote memorization.

Back in college, my girlfriend (to become my fiance, wife, and ex-wife) and I always studied together. We were both studying to be teachers, she elementary education, me secondary education science.

She would study by rote memorization, repeating things to herself silently, or sometimes out loud. When I would question her about what she learned, she would often not have a real understanding of what she learned. But it worked for her, she graduated summa cum laude and had an outstanding career as a reading teacher.

Rote memorization never worked for me (maybe because I have a poor memory). When I would study I would combine memorization with a thorough understanding of the topic. Why do I need to learn this? How does this match up with past learning? How does this relate to similar topics? How can this be extrapolated? How might I possibly confuse this with similar topics? What are examples of this topic?

Same thing when I taught middle school science. While my students had to memorize some things, I often tried to teach them using my system of memorization combined with a thorough understanding of the topic. Even something that many teachers usually taught using only rote memory, like element symbols (that I memorized poorly in high school). I would explain to my students how these symbols came to be. Why can't Nickel be N? Why can't Radon be Ra? Why are few element symbols based on Latin? What's Wolfram? Most teachers (like my high school chemistry teacher, Mr. Dalton) would simply pass out an element symbol handout and say, "Memorize it".

And I would allow my students to take the element symbol quiz multiple times. The grade wasn't important, learning the symbols was important because we were going to move on to actually "using" the symbols (with periodic tables that didn't have element names, just symbols).

Note: Back in high school, I struggled with memorizing element symbols, especially the Latin element symbols. My Dad gave me a silly, possibly stupid, hint that I remember to this day. "When the Mercury goes up in the thermometer, the grass grows high, thus Mercury's symbol is Hg, high grass". Worked for me, easier than telling me that the symbol is based on the Latin (or Greek) word for Mercury, hydrargyrum.

While I'm sure that there are exceptions (like my girlfriend), by combining memorization with a thorough understanding leads to longer lived learning.

[Raymond]

Your post is an ironic response to my statement that you sometimes kill/stifle fruitful conversations.... LOL

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Your post is an ironic response to my statement that you sometimes kill/stifle fruitful conversations ...

This thread turned out to be quite fruitful.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Thanks to my Forum colleagues and friends, I've decided that IAABO rule reference citation (10-2-2 Team Technical) is incorrect. The rule reference citation should be 10-5-2 Bench Technical.

Mostly due to Raymond's participation.

I'm still not sure what the right answer is (or will be), but I know what the interpretation to the situation should be.

And when the rubber meets the road, that's what this exam should be all about.

While my annual goal of doing as best as I possibly can is worthwhile, it's not more important than a thorough knowledge of the rules and interpretations, including really weird once in a season/decade/career situations.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Why can't Nickel be N? Why can't Radon be Ra? Why are few element symbols based on Latin? What's Wolfram?

Any science nerds out there want to give it a try?