Literary review

J. Pinto (2008) claims that automation has brought an end to long term employment contracts, arguing that “This kind of employment has little place in today’s workplace”. However, W. Amette (1998) points out that a new form of worker is needed, and that although long contracts for manual labour are at thing of the past, companies now need highly skilled and technically trained workers to look after the machines. In the office there is also a loss of menial jobs such as accounting and filing, and N. Kannan (2010) reports that this is not due to outsourcing, but more to do with automation. In contradiction to this D. Pelleteir (2008) claims that a lot of the job losses are down to outsourcing to customers, such as cashier-less checkouts and internet banking. Through automation and customer self-service, a lot of customer relations jobs are being lost. TIME (2010) points out that through automation in the chemical industriy, “the number of production jobs has fallen 3% since 1956 while output has soared 27%”. This shows that automation is not culling the job market as some have argued.

References:

J. Pinto 2008 http://www.automationworld.com/columns-4345 [13.10.2010]

W. Amette 1998 http://www.willamette.edu/~fthompso/MgmtCon/Automation.html [15.10.2010]

N. Kannan 2010 http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/narikannan/is-the-loss-of-it-jobs-due-to-increasing-it-automation-or-outsourcing-39427 [15.10.2010]

D. Pelleter 2008 http://memebox.com/futureblogger/show/825-most-jobs-could-be-lost-to-automation-in-near-future [15.10.2010]

TIME Magazine 2010 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,828815,00.html [16.10.2010]

VARK Questionnaire Analysis and Reflection

Visual Score: 4
Aural Score: 2
Read/Write Score: 9
Kinetic Score: 5

In an analysis of my VARK questionnaire, I do not find any real anomalies with the results. I would have expected a slightly more rounded set, the 9 being a 7 and the 2 a 3, but I suppose this means that I have a much clearer direction to focus my learning in.

In reflection of the questionnaire, the visual score is understandable. When I consider my relationships with diagrams and visual representations I can begin to see that they are not my strongest learning area, but they are not my weakest either.

My aural score is very surprising; I have always thought I have been good at listening and understanding vocal commands and lectures. However, I do have a history of failing to remember vocal commands, and this would explain that. In the future I need to remember to write down what people tell me to do, that way I will be able to remember them a lot better.

The read/write score is of little surprise, I have always been good at remembering what I have read and at learning from books. I would not say that I am better at writing, from my experience it makes little difference to me, but through reading I can gain much knowledge and retain it without too much effort.

The kinetic score is a little surprising; I would have expected it to be a little lower, at least below the visual score. I have never though of my self as any form of a kinetic learner, and I cannot think of any real examples of me learning though that system.

Approches to Learning and Studying

After working through the hand out about the approaches to learning and studying, I completed the scoring system, and discovered that out of the three styles – Systematic, Surface and Deep – I came out as a systematic/deep learner. By this I have gathered that it means although I do not necessarily understand what I am doing, or have an end goal, I will work hard at what I am doing and aim to succeed.

In reflection of this, I agree mainly with the questionnaire. I would say that I am not as organised as the test presents me, as although I am organised in the areas it queries, I am not organised in others. One interesting fact the questionnaire revealed to me is that it was not my choice to be on this course, and it is not me that is pushing to succeed at this, weather this will affect my input is a question of time, but now that I’m aware I will look at changing this or at least using it in some productive way.

Reflection on Learning Styles Analysis

Looking over my completed Learning Styles Analysis, with me being as honest as I can be, I appear to have scored highly in the Deep Learning area, and moderately in the Systematic area. In the Surface Learning area I have a low score.

Judging from this and a little reflection by my self this seems to make sense. In everything that I have done in education for at least the last two years has had me straining to understand what I am being taught and more. I think I have remembered most of what I was taught at A level last year, especially the philosophy and politics, although that will be of little help to me in my engineering course, except for those mystical transferable skills. I seem to have developed a much more systematic approach to learning over the last year, making time to do things, setting deadlines for myself well ahead of the actual ones, forcing myself to complete work early. I just hope it will continue.