User talk:Jarrokam

Misconceptions: My understanding of the topic: Geomorphology is only intuitive.

If we undertake a relational analysis and just steal the terms: Exogenous and Endogenous, for the sake of simplicity, we can then peel the analysis inward as long as it remains pertinent.

The primary layer is electrostatic in nature. As a response to the solar wind the planet is generating a magnetic field that interacts with what is external. Like the fur of a long haired mammal, when viewed from the outside it would be seen as the surface of the creature and hence the first layer of endogeny.

To balance a view from the outside we need a planet centred observer’s view: exogenous. Where, to pull the figurative mammal further, does the fur give way to skin and the skin to flesh? In addition proper relational analysis requires documenting obvious implications that is obviated by juxtaposing a consistent balance of both views: from the outside and from the centre.

A mammal has been chosen for this analogy to reinforce thinking of the planet as a living thing because it is. We need to be aware that we represent ticks and flees rather than lonely sentient wanderers in a barren wasteland.

The Geomorphology seems to be an exhaustive documentation of what is deemed to be landscape. This in itself is a worthwhile endeavour. Thank you dave for your patience. I am an autodidact as you may well imagine, from the previous interactions. Praise and Joy! - as one types >emerg< in the search function, low, "Emergent phenomena" appears, as if by magic in the drop-down list: relieving me of my obscurity. One last question for now, is this paper still associated with a 'school'?


 * I would say no, because there aren't any school links to it. See Special:WhatLinksHere/Emergent_Phenomena. I wouldn't put too much stock in school links, however. They haven't been maintained for years. If you want the content to be associated with a portal, be sure to add appropriate categories to the bottom of the page. Right now, the only category listed is Essays. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 20:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Geomorphology
You posted at : [Dave please advise:16:09, 26 September 2016 (diff | hist). . (+1,220)‎ . . N Talk:Geomorphology ‎ (Opening Discussion Jarrokam.14:09-26-09-'16) (current)]


 * What advice are you seeking? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 17:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Let me prepare a short list [the four ~s ?] and get back- thank you so much for your attention -jarro Well, for example the only way I can think of to continue is to answer by editing this page... there is a more direct way?

As mentioned, I am dyslexic, and council I receive assumes a knowledge of how wikiversity works that I don’t posses. I happen upon things: discovered Wikiversity through the side panel of Wikipedia, submitted two articles but had no way to associate them with similar documents, and the only contacts I have had was to have someone determine that the name chosen tor the second paper ‘wouldn’t do’. This time I happened on a forum ‘geomorphology’ with nothing written there except a potential outline panel and I do not know how to proceed. The one comment so far seems anonymous and suggests that plate tectonics is not the main force driving the morphing of the planet and suggests that my comments be directed to Hydromorphology? Good News - it looks like you're the bureaucrat!


 * This is the best place for this discussion. The only other place would be my talk page, and this discussion isn't about me.


 * I would disagree slightly with your assessment that the council you receive assumes a knowledge of how Wikiversity works that you don't possess. I would instead suggest that it assumes a knowledge of Wikiversity that you must work toward possessing in order to be successful here.


 * Your suggestion that you just happened upon a forum on geomorphology isn't consistent with the evidence. You created Talk:Geomorphology yourself, and nothing links to that page, so you couldn't have come across it except by your own efforts.


 * The response you received on that page isn't anonymous. It was written by the author of the Geomorphology page, responding to your comments. You can confirm this by looking at his signature at the bottom of his comments and comparing it to.


 * How you should proceed depends on what your goal is. If you believe the content on Geomorphology is incorrect and want to fix it, you should continue the discussion there until you and the author can come to some agreement as to the corrections that are necessary. If you can't agree on correcting the one page, you should create a single short overview page and add the two different perspectives as subpages. If you believe the response on Talk:Geomorphology is incorrect and you want to expand on why your perspective is more accurate, you should provide additional resources supporting your view. If you agree that your comments are more in line with Hydromorphology and want to improve that article, you should direct your efforts there instead. If you find that you need assistance creating a single overview page and splitting the two essay perspectives, please let me know after you have exhausted your efforts discussing it with the page author first.


 * Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:00, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Dave. I opened a talk page in hopes of discovering who was responsible for Geomorphology. Further exploration has shown that the Geomorphology page, apparently empty is quite full one simply must scroll to the base of the side panel or click on any of the enclosed list. My apologies. Again Thank you for your patient assistance.

Education [Ontario]
I bear witness to the ‘Gestalt’ as it is transferred.

Continental Drift theory originally intuited by Wegener at the beginning of the twentieth century is now attributed to a female sonar expert in the ‘60s. Rather than being outraged by this as was my first impulse, after consideration, I believe that this is a positive direction for civilization.

Consider the implications of such attribution. The significant item in all this is understanding continental drift as a perception of how our planet works over time as she appreciates it. Instead of squabbling over credit, the new attribution puts an appropriate gender bias to associate with the appropriate technology.

Speaking of gestalt, I attended an ETFO [Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario] conference only to discover the immense pressure to indoctrinate our dear ones: - all day kindergarden without blankey or break; no wasted time on assemblies; no extra-curricular information over the speakers! Let’s face it folks: WE want our educational programs for kindergarden to grade school persons of Ontario to be the best “ed-factory” -EVER!

13:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jarrokam!

Your resource Standardized testing appears to be well-developed and ready for teachers and learners! Would you like to have it announced on our Main Page News? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC) Yes Please! That would be helpful. I also have this material in powerpoint and keynote should anyone wish to use it that way.Jarrokam (discuss • contribs)jarrokam12jun2017