Let me tell you something that I know. What's the one thing that students enjoy the least about their high school/college/university careers? No, it's not those ill three-hour lectures where the professor speaks at a speed similar to that of the now-fabled 60-second rewind feature on your VCR. (VCR? What the hell is that?) No, it's not the pain-in-the-patoot classes held at 8:30 a.m. (which, according to several scientific studies, is approximately three hours before the commencing point of a student's day in which he or she can function effectively). No, it's not even those strange 5 a.m. beer bong contests held during the first week of school (in fact, they seem to like those...although I can't imagine why -- but who doesn't love having vulgar liquid jammed down their throat?). I'm talking about those dreaded tests, examinations, midterms... call them what you wish; they all serve the same eventual purpose of dropping your grades and separating the geniuses from the grunts whose time would be better spent gnawing on paper.
Now I am more than a bit peeved for two reasons regarding this whole examination fiasco within which we must suffer! The first of which lies in what we are expected to know. There's nothing I retain less than minute obscure little factoids. I can only remember so much about a particular topic, and in the process of recollection, my brain will probably sift out all the extra little nonsense that I don't really need to know. I feel that what we should be tested on is the "big picture". Professors should revel in the notion that their students get the basic idea of what they're talking about. Yet if you ask us about very explicit details...well, you're not going to feel as marvelled now, are ya, Captain Professor?
I just took three mid-terms in a row. I know nothing beyond the fact that France exists.
Secondly is something a little more annoying still -- the theory of professor continuity. Consider this: if a professor is delivering to his beloved students information regarding an upcoming test, be it the content, the format, or other tidbits, should the professor not ensure that the factoids they dispense are...the real deal? I have a story to back this up! An unnamed professor gives us the specific outline of the test (and even the pages from our text to which these questions shall be plucked). "Great!" That's what I thought. I studied hard for that test; I answered every question and was ready for them! Eurodeputés, traité de Rome, IVème République...I knew them all! I even memorized tons of important dates in history! And then the day of the test arrived...I was pretty damn confident! "Bring it on, chief!" That's what I thought. We receive the test...and there's a big ol' map to label...worth a very significant chunk of the final test mark. "You nuts?!?! You must be nuts! NUTS!!!" That's what I thought. There were also a long list of questions. Those dates...what were they good for? Very little, apparently. There were only 2 questions with dates. The answers? "Oui" and "1957". Bah! I was so upset. Thank goodness for an angry mob outside for me to join to make me feel better. Examinations should not be so torturous.
Thank goodness I wore deodorant that day, by the way, or else everyone would've smelled my nervous sweat.