Out of curosity, do you think all nighters for exams actually work?

[DeuceWallaces]

That's ****ing nonsense. I don't know the guy, and so can't comment in his case, but to say a student cannot know 'about any subject more than any professor teaching one of your classes' is patently idiotic. Just because you never put the time in to go well beyond the taught syllabus, doesn't mean others don't do otherwise. Moreover, many teachers teach stuff they really don't know that well, as they just needed to find someone for that particular module - they most definitely do not always teach their speciality, which is after all, what most of their time is spent on.

There are a few very intelligent students out there, and plenty of irredeemably unintelligent professors. Kingsley Amis, who was a very good and knowledgeable teacher and professor, said that any class that doesn't contain a student who makes the teacher a bit afraid due to his extensive knowledge of the subject, and intelligence, is a class that won't get the most out of the teacher.

You're an idiot if you believe that. Some kid 2 years into his/her bio degree knows nothing compared to someone who has a PhD and worked most likely a decade in the field.

[Joyner82reload]

You're an idiot if you believe that. Some kid 2 years into his/her bio degree knows nothing compared to someone who has a PhD and worked most likely a decade in the field.

First off, I'm a senior double majoring in Biochemistry and general Biology. Secondly, LOL @ you thinking every professor has infinite knowledge of the field they are teaching. There is a reason you have some professors teaching multiple courses within a discipline. It's because the University needs teachers to feel that criteria, not because they are all knowing in that department. Most universities are focused on research within the science department, they could give a flying fvck about how well they lecture as long as the grades fit gaussian distribution.

Then again, you believe it's superior to put in no effort and end up a C student than bust your ass and make A's. So I'm not surprised that your mind is blown by the knowledge possessed by your teachers.

[Overdrive]

You're an idiot if you believe that. Some kid 2 years into his/her bio degree knows nothing compared to someone who has a PhD and worked most likely a decade in the field.

That may apply in very specialized studies with specialized teachers. Put wide fields like biology/chemistry/physics use scientists who actually work on totally different long time projects, but hold certain lectures, because they're part of the teaching staff of a university.

We had some programming in our curriculum and the guy teaching it was a Dr.rer.nat, which is a title here for someone acquiring a DDr in natural sciences, in his case tech maths and some field of physics. He knew what he had to teach, but not much further computing background. A guy in our group was a total computing geek and he basically helped the prof explaining what's going on to the students.

[DeuceWallaces]

First off, I'm a senior double majoring in Biochemistry and general Biology. Secondly, LOL @ you thinking every professor has infinite knowledge of the field they are teaching. There is a reason you have some professors teaching multiple courses within a discipline. It's because the University needs teachers to feel that criteria, not because they are all knowing in that department. Most universities are focused on research within the science department, they could give a flying fvck about how well they lecture as long as the grades fit gaussian distribution.

Then again, you believe it's superior to put in no effort and end up a C student than bust your ass and make A's. So I'm not surprised that your mind is blown by the knowledge possessed by your teachers.

That doesn't mean shit. Any professor in their general field, teaching in their general field, makes you look retarded even if they're not teaching some 400 level class in their specific research area. The fact you think otherwise is ****ing hilarious. The first part of becoming a good scientist is admitting what you don't know.

If you ever get your shit together enough to make it through a MS and a PhD you'll look back in embarrassment at these posts. Although, it's more likely with your attitude that you'll never make it there to begin with.

[ace23]

What DW is saying is true for the most part, but there are obviously exceptions. Maybe Joyner is an exception. He's probably not, but who knows? There's no use in arguing over this. Lol

[Balla_Status]

Yes, but only if you haven't looked over all the material at least once before and you don't really pay too much attention in class.

Sometimes you just have too many tests/work the previous days that you have to do the all nighter (engineering major). Done it for physics and thermodynamics. I only lasted until 4 am for physics but saw the sunlight for my thermo exam.

Ended up getting Cs in both so I reckon it worked.

[Balla_Status]

I disagree. Muscle memory is not the same as learning terms.

Depends on the class bro. You're not learning terms when you're doing calculus/diff eq.

[Balla_Status]

What DW is saying is true for the most part, but there are obviously exceptions. Maybe Joyner is an exception. He's probably not, but who knows? There's no use in arguing over this. Lol

I think joyner may have included his drawing of paris as one of his all nighters.

[shlver]

What DW is saying is true for the most part, but there are obviously exceptions. Maybe Joyner is an exception. He's probably not, but who knows? There's no use in arguing over this. Lol

He's not. Joyner admits he never studied then makes the assertion he "generally knows more than all of his lecturers." Joyner sounds pretty delusional. Reciting the atpases involved in chromatin condensation is completely useless knowledge. Real knowledge is understanding the physical principles behind experimental design and being able to manipulate/troubleshoot the experiment.

[shlver]

No all nighters do not work. You learn through exposure, and it's obvious to know the material you should expose yourself to it multiple times. When you cram all night the information is not retained long term and you are operating on short term memory while sleep deprived. You also experience elevation of certain brain chemicals that cause oxidative stress from sleep deprivation.

You will perform much better studying properly by reviewing and consolidating your notes the same day of the lecture.

[Heilige]

No all nighters do not work. You learn through exposure, and it's obvious to know the material you should expose yourself to it multiple times. When you cram all night the information is not retained long term and you are operating on short term memory while sleep deprived. You also experience elevation of certain brain chemicals that cause oxidative stress from sleep deprivation.

You will perform much better studying properly by reviewing and consolidating your notes the same day of the lecture.

I see where you're coming from. How was Peyton Manning able to do this if all nighters do not work:

To understand where Manning is today, we have to go to the Colts practice facility on West 56th Street in Indianapolis in 1998. When Manning reports after being picked first in the draft, his position coach Bruce Arians sets up a video machine in Manning's hotel room. The night before Manning's first minicamp practice, Arians watches tape with Manning until 3 a.m. Finally, Arians goes to bed. Manning, apparently, does not. The next day at the practice facility, Manning steps in the huddle and knows every play. Doesn't even use a wristband.

"I don't know if he even slept that night," said Arians, who now is the head coach of the Cardinals. "When he stepped in the huddle and started calling everything, the rest of the guys just stopped. It was amazing."

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/91281874

[shlver]

I see where you're coming from. How was Peyton Manning able to do this if all nighters do not work:



http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/91281874

That example is completely irrelevant.

[Heilige]

That example is completely irrelevant.

How was Peyton able to do something like that though? I think it's impressive!

[Joyner82reload]

He's not. Joyner admits he never studied then makes the assertion he "generally knows more than all of his lecturers." Joyner sounds pretty delusional. Reciting the atpases involved in chromatin condensation is completely useless knowledge. Real knowledge is understanding the physical principles behind experimental design and being able to manipulate/troubleshoot the experiment.

You should probably thoroughly read my post. I stated that I used to pull all nighters, which was a consequence of my lack of studying up until that point. I generally put in 6-8 hours a day, 7 days a week at this point.

[shlver]

How was Peyton able to do something like that though? I think it's impressive!

Because he wants to show his team he has the motivation to win. He's a competitor and he leads by example by showing effort. I still don't see how that example has anything to do with the effectiveness of pulling an all nighter for an exam.