1.6 KiB
id, title, tags, date-created, daily
| id | title | tags | date-created | daily | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-23T12:48:49-0400 | 2026-03-23 12:48:49 |
|
2026-03-23T12:48:49-04:00 | 2026-03-23 |
2026-03-23 12:48:49
joel-jansen asked me to give feedback on the project engineer I've had shadowing and helping me on charlotte-south-end-hotel.
They've been exceptionally engaged, with an impressive ability to follow along with procedures that are based in electrical and general construction considerations that they weren't already familiar with. I told Joel the same.
I added that I appreciated that their engagement extends to my explanations of my thought processes during takeoff, which can be quite abstract.
I found the PE's receptivity a pleasant surprise. In my experience training estimating, both at Ace and PDI, I have to be very careful with my words to prevent unintended interpretation. More than once I have said casually that some low-sensitivity consideration "doesn't matter", finding later that the student has over-generalized the direction and is not properly discriminating between significantly different cases. Other times, the student continues to discriminate between nearly identical cases even despite repeated instruction that consideration of the differences is not worth their effort.
I think both behaviors indicate an inability for abstract thinking. The first case seems like over-abstraction, but in practice it is usually rooted in the principle of least effort. That is, the student assumes that considerations that would be unpleasant to account for are the same as those that are not worth accounting for, which is a category-mistake.