Exams and how INTPs cope with them.

[zxc]

I never listen to my teachers and have recently stopped studying as much or at all for most of my subjects. As a result I've been getting...let's just say "really bad grades" this year for science, but still passing so I'm fine with it. The other subjects are also okay I guess. Besides studying, I think the main problem for me is the time limits. I am a bit or shall I say a lot slower than most. My most shameful moments were on a science test which the teacher had to bubble in for me and a math quiz that had a short answer part to it in which I only completed one part of one question. I wonder if the rest of you guys take a long time on tests as well.

Time is always my biggest issue (in anything, be it decision-making, exams, chess, etc).

I'm currently undergoing my Year 12 (final year of secondary school) exams

 

[anemian]

I have only ever studied on a small handfull of times. And have only failed(c or lower) tests an even smaller handfull of times. (note no correlation).

However in class I pay perfect attention. Everything the teacher says I repeat in my own head, I think through the larger parts of the topics, and occasionally take notes of details(since details suck).

 

[Tiger]

its makes me jealous to read you could recall enough to get by. i really have no memory for things that are said - i can remeber the colour of the teachers tie but none of his unintelligent gobbeldy-gook.
i didn't study - at all.
or hand my assignmetns in
or turn up to all my classes, muhaha
universities would ahve laughed in my face if i had applied.
i suppose i chose the wrong classes, they were either too easy or too boring and left brained. all my interests stole the energy my schoolwork needed.
because i didn't study i had to figure out what the questiosn were asking from scratch so i always ran out of working out space and time. or sometimes worse, i couln't make myself care enough and so i couldn't concerntrate enough to finish reading a single sentence. people got angry at me because they saw me scartching the logo off my pencil and staring at the ceiling during my final exams.

 

[INTPINFP]

The only time I can study is when I am around friends or playing xbox. I can't study at night because I am on anti-physcotic and I get very sleepy at that time. If I try to study without any external stimuli present I feel very alone and my mind cannot focus on the material. Conversely, I cannot study with too much external stimuli since I will become too focused on said stimuli.

 

[SEPKA]

I took a lot of humanity class (because science become boring when you have studies all they can offer in the syllabus), so it becomes quite hard at subject such as history and literature. I usually get at least a pass for those even without studying, and a ~70% with studying. However, I find the best mindset when coming for exam is that "it is just a mock exams" (even though it is a real one). It allows me to daydream during exams, pound on my creativity when writing essay, or find faster method to solve problems. It works mostly quite well (except for a fail because the paper ask us to choose 3/6 question but I do all 6 and have not enough time). I got the reputation of still doing random irrelevant reading while all my classmates stress themselves out mugging (the studying meaning) and practising.

 

[Enne]

Oh man. I don't study (never really have). When I was in primary / secondary school I was practically sat on by my mom in order to study, and when I got to university relied on pretty much the same non-study study system. Gen eds have been my friends: passively absorb information, or else rely on information learnt in college prep classes to ace the exams. Apart from that in engineering courses I tend to absorb things in one large go towards the end of the semester... come to think if it there are times when I don't even know how my professors are adequately convinced of my knowledge of the material...

Other than that, outside projects / business plans / 'real world stuff' / independent studies / professors who reward 'upward trends' have been my friends.

 

[INTPINFP]

I took a lot of humanity class (because science become boring when you have studies all they can offer in the syllabus), so it becomes quite hard at subject such as history and literature. I usually get at least a pass for those even without studying, and a ~70% with studying. However, I find the best mindset when coming for exam is that "it is just a mock exams" (even though it is a real one). It allows me to daydream during exams, pound on my creativity when writing essay, or find faster method to solve problems. It works mostly quite well (except for a fail because the paper ask us to choose 3/6 question but I do all 6 and have not enough time). I got the reputation of still doing random irrelevant reading while all my classmates stress themselves out mugging (the studying meaning) and practising.

That's precisely the problem. When I take an exam I don't always have the lowest score, but I always (everytime) am the last guy finishing. Often times the buzzer sounds and I still haven't finished the test.

 

[Minuend]

No matter how hard I study, I never get As. B is the best I can do. So I went through school without studying. I never failed, but my grades weren't good. Even now, it's difficult for me to study, because I know the results will be pathetic. So I have really huge gaps in my knowledge. I barely know anything. I'm learning different things by myself, though, from scratch. I like learning when there's no expectations of me achieving anything.

 

[INTPINFP]

Same here. When theres a time limit I take longer on a test than I would have without a time limit, ironically.

About your motto, yeah my friends say that to me too, I don't know if its because they don't think I'm capable of making anything great, or if its because what I made was actually great. I'm thinking its the latter

 

[Latro]

Seriously, who calculates the inverse of a 20x20 matrix by hand? That's why we have computers!!! Engineering classes make me want to kill people...

...What? There's no way you were made to compute the inverse of a 20x20 matrix by hand. That requires roughly 16000 arithmetic operations, it'd be absurd for you to do that...

 

[Trebuchet]

Which is precisely why tests are so wrong. Education should not be about Information. Information is not knowledge. Most things "learned" in school are forgotten in a few years, unless they are actually used. Memorizing by itself is worthless, and that is why we have libraries and databases for, and computers for number crunching.

No. Education should be about knowledge. That is, understanding. And skills. Not information. Essays, Projects, and Debates make you develop data gathering, analysis, and synthesis skills. Public speaking skills. Logic, analogy, metaphors, making parallels. They make you think and create, instead of spewing facts.

They are also more engaging, and might actually make you understand and remember the data in the long run, compared to just memorizing.

I'll have to come in on Kuu's side here. I don't think this is naive at all.

If people are taught a lot of data retention, then they have some facts. They can do most jobs, and follow directions really well. That is training, not education. Not everyone is suited for education, of course, and that is fine, since most people probably don't need it.

A few people are good at problem-solving, creativity, pattern recognition, analysis, and other skills Kuu mentioned. Not all of them are INTP, of course. I know an ESTJ who is brilliant at all of them, and many other non-INTP types too. Those people can be educated, and should be, as valuable resources to society, and because they deserve to be the best they can.

Instead, we have NCLB, classes taught to the lowest levels, and tests on things that are easy to test, mainly data retention. My niece had to read something off the Great Books List, I forget what, and her whole family read it together, and discussed it over the dinner table for a month. She didn't score well on her test, though, because the teacher asked what was the name of the ex-girlfriend of the main character, early in the book. She didn't remember because it was irrelevant, but it sure was easy to test.

Richard Feynman (who I am certain was an INTP) wrote about a biology class he took, while he was a professor at Princeton. He did a study of the nervous system of cats.

When it came time for me to give my talk on the subject, I started off by drawing an outline of the cat and began to name the various muscles.

The other students in the class interrupt me: "We know all of that!"

"Oh," I say, "you do? Then no wonder I can catch up with you so fast after you've had four years of biology." They had wasted all their time memorizing stuff like that, when it could be looked up in fifteen minutes.

(Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman, p.72)​

Data retention certainly isn't worthless, but I don't see it as real education.

 

[INTPINFP]

That example in the book is prime. Who remembers the name of every non-essential charachter in some romance novel for godsakes! Did Einstein spend his time memorizing the names of third-rate charachters?

 

[Enne]

The problem, I believe, is that a large part of traditional education is based on classism and perception. In other words, what the wealthier classes / ruling classes believed to be important. Back when learning was reserved for an elite few, these people more or less chose which artists, novelists, poets, etc they would play patron to, and there was also the views of the rich and powerful clergy that had to be respected. From there, it was determined for centuries which cultures were to b glorified and prized, and whose novels were the "in thing" to be reading / debating / analyzing, etc.

I think that from there, lower class, educated people, who used the wealthy classes as their yardstick for success, took these preset preferences to mean the best way of doing things, and the selections to be the best of tastes possible. Also, I'm not at all surprised with the way that modern education is presented, as the lower / working classes are always 'allowed' to know just enough to do whatever job the ruling classes / corporations would have us do. While I'm a firm believer in true understanding (pretty much what Kuu said), I also note that the purpose our "our" educations is to prepare us to be good employees (one of the reasons things like tardiness or resisting groupthink are so severely punished in compulsory education). When I was younger I also noticed that many of the great rulers of past periods were educated on a more one on one/ Socratic level, because THEIR learning was based on higher goals and eventual leadership, and I think that gifted / wealthier people are more likely to be educated like that even today.

The bottom line to my 'tangent' is that I don't look upon most standard formal education for the most part as anything other than preparing us to transition to the next phase, with the end goal (for the most part) being an employee operating on maximized efficiency.

As an INTP (or even XNTP), whose natural 'role' / passion is creating new systems, it would be understandably difficult to jump through the hoops of academia. To an XNTP, it probably looks like some sort of warped false promise - "Here are all these resources and innovations, all these wonderful starting points of information, echoing from past eras to feed your Ti or Ne to your hearts' delight, and serve as the tools you need to make the system better..."

"But whoops! You'll need a permit to get past this gate, And oh dear.. how can we allow you access to K-Z without your certification of A-J? And why are you interested in this stuff anyway? GET BACK TO WORK!!!"

:/ It's a strange conundrum.

 

[SEPKA]

I have the opportunity to study in both the British and the French education system. I must say the French system are waaayyyy better than the British. They emphasis on on definition, in-depth understanding of concept, proof, anomalies, inductive reasoning. Some amount of creativity are allowed during exams, and maths and science test are usually long time limit, short but hard conceptual question. Too bad that was the system a few decade ago...
However, if you looks at the French and their previously colonized country (which are like to still using the French system) their economy was not that good, while those of the British seems to fare better. Perhap it had something to do with the fact that most people are not suitable for the concept focused style of education, but prefer to learn fact as it is.
So I think one problems is that education are forced on everybody equally regardless of preference. I support a segregated school system based on preference of style of learning, but of course there would be quite some problem with such system.
Oh yes, I hate groupthink. All my teacher all at least once said something to me "if you do like that in the future, your employer will fire you". My response is always "I'm my own boss". Perhap that is why I got such a low attitude grade.
I also don't understand why most people have to force themselves to practice the same type of question over and over again, it is so pointless. In the furture I would just program my computer to do all that unnecessary stuff.

 

[Aiss]

I used to pass tests effortlessly in school (as in, with no studying whatsoever, or very limited amount of it if I didn't pay attention in class at all). This is partly because I'm normally just stressed enough to do better than usual, not so much it paralyzes me. Another thing may be that I was lucky enough to have teachers who were accepting of thinking out of the box, and I happened to always have classmates who did just that. Even when we had to learn the "right" interpretation of some novel or drama, and we've got our high school exams (external ones) checked according to this, essays and discussion were open to new ideas (the extent of it depended on a teacher obviously).

Now in the uni it's hard to break old habits of studying too little. I think if school was more challenging, I wouldn't have gotten so lazy... but of course this is just trying to lay the blame elsewhere. The truth is I'm procrastinating. I still need *relatively* little studying to do well, but I tend to do too little, and got some bad grades because of it. I'm changing it, but it's going way too slow for my liking.

 

[Kuu]

...What? There's no way you were made to compute the inverse of a 20x20 matrix by hand. That requires roughly 16000 arithmetic operations, it'd be absurd for you to do that...

That wasn't an exam, but it was a project worth the same as an exam (that teacher was a total asshole...). I should have clarified that. It came to mind as the most vivid example of the most ridiculous ways we are made to do rote things that nobody does in the real world, and that machines can do so much efficiently.

And 1 years later, I still don't understand the conceptual basis that makes a matrix an adequate model for calculating the bar stresses on a truss structure. Or why I should care. We were just told to do it that way, not to understand the essence of it.

And the most absurd thing is not that nobody in the real world does it by hand, but that architects never do the structural engineering... just a rough conception of the structural system that could/shall be used. But the educational system doesn't have a "structural concepts for architects" class, just a watered down structural engineering class that is given to us. But the way of thinking, and the kind of problems for the professions are completely different... (SJ vs NP) And we were left with gaping holes of knowledge on understanding the conceptual basis of a lot of things, the logic of structures (what we ultimately need)... but nevertheless able to calculate them, the numbers of structures (what we'll never do)...

After all, I can conclude that I have learned more from this gem of a book than from 3 entire structures classes...

 

[transformers]

I absolutely need to study in order to do well in an exam, but unfortunately I have so little self discipline that I often end up staying up the night before rather than studying regularly all semester. It's a habit I'm trying to change.

 

[Ombat]

I barely ever study because I just... don't want to. So on test where I need to have memorized a lot of facts (like my stupid AP US history class last year...) I would usually get low C's/D'son all of the tests because I only knew the concepts. When I'm tested on other subjects like math, physics, or something that's primarily logic based, like environmental science, I usually get A's and B's. I'm a senior in high school and I've managed a 4.0 GPA... so I guess studying wasn't all that important.

I'm just scared that I'll completely fail in college, because I don't even know how to study.

 

[Latro]

I'm just scared that I'll completely fail in college, because I don't even know how to study.

I didn't have any idea how to study when I got here, and what tiny bit of studying I've had to do (on top of the effective 0 that I did in HS) I've gotten done pretty well. So I wouldn't worry too much about it; the only thing is that you do actually have to study some, primarily since the graded homework doesn't really force you to work enough to thoroughly absorb the material, and since lecture doesn't typically stay on the same topic for long enough for all of the topics to sink in.

All just my experience of course.

I don't think I ever responded to the OP of this thread btw:
I just do. I've never really had test-taking trouble. Test-taking is one of my better aptitudes, especially if I don't have to write an essay or something similar. I've gotten a bit worse at it in the last couple years but not much. Then again I think on tests my "x" flips to "J" in some sense, or at least used to; maybe more recently my "x" gravitating towards "P" is what makes my test taking a bit more difficult.

 

[Aiss]

I'm just scared that I'll completely fail in college, because I don't even know how to study.

Laziness is your greatest enemy here. The worst thing high school does is, in my opinion, get people used to scoring well despite never having to learn at home. I took it a bit too far and only ever did homework between classes. Unless you're a born and schooled procrastinator, you should be alright.

 

[Enne]

That is true. In college understanding is key; esp. if you are going into the sciences / engineering. The sheer volume, and the speed at which this volume is covered can prove very unkind to those who not only do not understand the material, but fall behind in it.

 

[Yellow]

I love love love written exams. I am almost always the first one finished and I am always in the top 10%. They rock because the grade is objective. All you have to do is know the material and I remember every[academic]thing I hear or read.

I had to study for lab exams. I did struggle to classify things by sight (oh, the histology!) so that took some serious time. When I was about to have to determine the species and subspecies of a small mammal by its latin names when only the bone in the penis or the shade of it front teeth could distinguish it from another, and there were 50 things like that in each exam, I needed a plan of attack. I would spend the week making sure I could name whatever it was the easy way (with perfect, in-tact images) then the night before, I would go to bed early [if possible], get up early, and cram like hell.