-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
How many hows of tutoring? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dabatman
- Start date
KingOfActing
lukewarm mess
0 hours of tutoring
Martin_SSEDU
Active Member
I personally did 4 hours for maths 2 hours for english. Was definitely enough to cover everything I needed so I could go home and do practice and stay on top of school work.
2 hours for 3U , 2 hours for 4U and 2 hours for English.
But to be honest, you should be studying way more than you go to tutor. It's usually through self-practice that you really get a solid opportunity to master everything you learn in your classes both at tutor and school.
2 hours for 3U , 2 hours for 4U and 2 hours for English.
But to be honest, you should be studying way more than you go to tutor. It's usually through self-practice that you really get a solid opportunity to master everything you learn in your classes both at tutor and school.
UnbiasedProductivity
The lurker.
Zero.
Sames. Though it really depends on many factors: your teacher, how well you are doing, how well you want to do, etc. Just consider these factors, and think if tutoring would be beneficial. Will you really improve much with tutoring?
Most important parameter: how smart you are. Unfortunately, some people are born smarter than others; they have chosen the right parents.
A very controversial comment by someone who is supposedly renowned and respected on BoS. This conclusion came from a short browse of your history.
You could be fiercely intelligent but have no discipline nor self-control, therefore 'wasting' your intelligence.
It seems that you believe intelligence is fixed, you are either good at something or not and your abilities determine everything. Instead, encourage a mindset that leads to growth by believing that intelligence is malleable, you can learn anything you want to and your efforts and attitudes determine everything. Please do not ruin other student's mindsets. There has been research done on this by Carol Dweck who identifies these two mindsets as 'fixed mindset' and 'growth mindset'.
Your last remark is quite disturbing, especially to 'less advanced' people.
I wouldn't exactly say that. I think the reason I have excelled in math is because my parents nailed the fundamentals into me in primary school; not because I was tutored (I wasn't), I was born smarter (haven't tested my IQ, doubt it's that high if much higher than average), or anything. Most of my friends who are good at math just have had their parents (or tutor if their parents don't have a good background in math) help them understand and be fully competent at the fundamentals. Then even without trying that hard, it is relatively hard, you can get good results.
I'll just state that's my opinion, I'm always willing to change my mind given good evidence, this is just going off my intuition as to what would be the case, and anecdotes.
That's very healthy - to have an open mind.
I suspect many who are not strong in maths at later stages of high school are so because of poor foundation in maths during primary school. This I suspect is the poor maths ability of primary school teachers (I have no evidence - I have never been in a primary school here) - leading to latter difficulties. But there are some I notice are slow. From my tutoring experience (teaching at very close quarters), there are some who find it hard to grasp relatively concepts. What would you call such people. Some may like to give them euphemistic classifications.
Yeah, a lot would be due to the teaching they receive in primary school. I definitely wont deny that there are a lot of people who suffer due to low IQ's or other genetic factors, but I feel like they may make up a relatively small percentage of the people who do struggle with math. And could it also be selection bias, as you are a tutor, you would encounter more people who are struggling at math and have an inherent difficulty in understanding math?
Someone like that might say they of themself that they are "not a math person".
Now I’m gonna firstly place my definition of intelligence here, as to avoid future confusion. I define intelligence as one’s ability to think rationally, recognise patterns, so essentially their ability to learn new concepts and their problem solving ability.
I assert that people who attain the top scores in HSC school mathematics exams are not necessarily the cleverest. Getting 100% in HSC style exams (in recent exams anyways) just requires a basic understanding of the fundamentals, as well as minimising silly errors.
However I disagree when someone says that intelligence does not play a huge role in shaping one’s mathematical ability – just gonna put the harsh reality out there. Now, I attended the top selective high where 99.95% of the cohort has good /similar understanding of the core concepts. However, there are some people, despite not having any more mathematical knowledge/ understanding of fundamentals than others, who can instantly see ways to do a problem. Now assuming that everyone studied equally (which is a fair assumption to make at my school), the only MAJOR difference here would be differences in intelligence/ ability to think. So I assert that for these kinds of people, they really do differ from the rest because of their intelligence.
So to sum up let me just again reassert that school mathematics exams scores don’t mean much in revealing one’s intelligence, but rather it is those who can solve ‘hard’ problems who are truly intelligent. Of course, someone who has more knowledge than others has an advantage- there is no dispute to that. However, having come from a school where everyone has very similar amounts of knowledge+ motivation, yet huge disparities in problem solving ability exist, I’m gonna have to say that when someone says intelligence doesn’t play a role in shaping one’s mathematical abilities, they’re wrong.
This can be extended to all subjects actually, I don’t think any school exam scores should be a reflection of one’s ability to think or learn (because unfortunately, most exams are now about who rote learns the best responses rather than a reflection of their ability to think).
Now as to whether intelligence is fixed or not, I have not come across any reliable studies to show a strong favour of either. Though obviously, we would all (including geniuses) want the latter to be true
I assert that people who attain the top scores in HSC school mathematics exams are not necessarily the cleverest. Getting 100% in HSC style exams (in recent exams anyways) just requires a basic understanding of the fundamentals, as well as minimising silly errors.
However I disagree when someone says that intelligence does not play a huge role in shaping one’s mathematical ability – just gonna put the harsh reality out there. Now, I attended the top selective high where 99.95% of the cohort has good /similar understanding of the core concepts. However, there are some people, despite not having any more mathematical knowledge/ understanding of fundamentals than others, who can instantly see ways to do a problem. Now assuming that everyone studied equally (which is a fair assumption to make at my school), the only MAJOR difference here would be differences in intelligence/ ability to think. So I assert that for these kinds of people, they really do differ from the rest because of their intelligence.
So to sum up let me just again reassert that school mathematics exams scores don’t mean much in revealing one’s intelligence, but rather it is those who can solve ‘hard’ problems who are truly intelligent. Of course, someone who has more knowledge than others has an advantage- there is no dispute to that. However, having come from a school where everyone has very similar amounts of knowledge+ motivation, yet huge disparities in problem solving ability exist, I’m gonna have to say that when someone says intelligence doesn’t play a role in shaping one’s mathematical abilities, they’re wrong.
This can be extended to all subjects actually, I don’t think any school exam scores should be a reflection of one’s ability to think or learn (because unfortunately, most exams are now about who rote learns the best responses rather than a reflection of their ability to think).
Now as to whether intelligence is fixed or not, I have not come across any reliable studies to show a strong favour of either. Though obviously, we would all (including geniuses) want the latter to be true