Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
5th April 2012, 09:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 5th April 2012, 09:45 PM by Bodger51.)
Hard to do where conflicts of interest prevent application.
pity.
Be nice to work for organisations that would allow extra curricular activities, which dont make peole wonder about confidence
But in the end they've got greater concerns and dont need loose cannons
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
Interesting potential debate for consideration of professional conduct with the utility of contemporary social medias.
Especially in administrative areas, and student time management experiences.
Universities have always had to monitor academic referencing access to prevent plagiarism and such, with work group learning being quite taxing on academic rigor, dependent upon group work workload cooperation.
Workplace innovation would be the next issue with regards to skill set consolidation activities, which could stem research group ethics
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Any possibility that Bodger51 is some sort of word-association computer programme? :face-stir:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2009
@ Dinosaur: Thanks - I thought it might just be me that has trouble catching his/her drift!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2012
Bodger51 Wrote:Be nice to work for organisations that would allow extra curricular activities, which dont make peole wonder about confidence
But in the end they've got greater concerns and dont need loose cannons
Paint-Balling anyone?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
I tend to agree with Wax, those who consider themselves well educated literate and numerate tend to see bad spelling and other educational problems as either laziness or inherent mental deficiency. These are attitudes that I thought were now all but obsolete, what with a more illuminated approach to educational needs now being the norm within most educational establishments. Having taken something of a break from archaeology to pursue training in the teaching / training sector, I can assure you that the barriers people find prevent them from attaining good levels of literacy and numeracy are many and varied, but a significant barrier to learning is negative attitudes much as those displayed here. I'd also like to point out that 'infinate' as used by P Prentice, is actually spelt 'infinite'. Strangely no one here seemed to pick up on this, but anybody can make a mistake so I'll give the benefit of doubt to this. Perhaps in future you may all consider doing the same.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Think you've lost the point of the original comments? Me/PP/whoever else doesn't have any problems with people's personal spelling abilities or lack of, or why that that may be the case (my current nightmare is an ancient laptop with sticky/semi-functional keys, for instance) - and certainly not an attack on people who suffer from dyslexia - purely an observation that there is no excuse for those problems to appear in finished archaeological reports? That's just sloppy and unprofessional and curators should be kicking them back (assuming they could even understand them in the first place!). And of course anyone who talks about 'linears' should never have been employed in the first place if they're so impressionable as to have picked up their archaeological vocabulary from watching Time Team with total disregard for grammar :face-stir:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
8th April 2012, 04:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 8th April 2012, 04:51 PM by Geli.)
I don't believe I did. Comments like peanuts and monkeys are hardly positive. The over riding tone of some of the earlier comments betray a certain attitude. It's one thing I've observed amongst people who attain higher level posts within the profession, is that they often see them selves as somehow more evolved and that those lower down the ladder are nothing more than shaved monkeys. I'm sure those at senior level can be as prone to making spelling and grammatical errors as anybody else.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
Agree with much of what you have all said. My point is that this is simply a matter of positive marketing. A company that knows that their profile will become public the moment they choose to advertise must surely take the time to proof-read the material they post. This is nothing to do with vilifying dyslexics-but everything to do with getting it right in marketing terms. In a competitive environment where companies emphasise professionalism, why (as a potential client) would I be drawn to a company where proof-reading and accuracy are negligible? :face-approve:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
Can't disagree with your point Troll, and knowing your good self I wouldn't imagine for one moment that you were aiming to vilify the dyslexic.
